MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3025605119

[Dementia care in Germany].

2017· article· nl· W3025605119 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
M H van der Vaart

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2017
Typearticle
Languagenl
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth and Medical Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDementiaDirectiveNursing homesAdvance care planningQuarter (Canadian coin)NursingGermanHealth careGerontologyDiseasePalliative care
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Germany there are approximately 1.6 million people with dementia. A quarter of them live in a care home, often alongside residents who have a physical condition. The quality of nursing for physical conditions is good; although specialised dementia care is less developed, this lag is slowly being addressed. Medical care in German care homes is delivered by GPs. Preservation of life is the norm. Due to the lack of both advance care planning and a non-resuscitation policy, many care home residents with dementia undergo life-extending measures. Through the use of an advance health care directive, people can protect themselves from such a situation occurring.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.616
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.110
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.308 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicHealth and Medical StudiesFrench-language works237,207