Medical assistance in dying in rural communities: A review of Canadian policies and guidelines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In June 2016, the Canadian Parliament passed Bill C-14, legalizing medical assistance in dying (MAiD), elsewhere known as voluntary euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide. Related legislation and policies continue to evolve. However, there is a paucity of scholarship regarding their distinct implications for rural communities. This is significant given that rurality is an underrecognized but important determinant of health. In order to address this gap, we conducted a rural-focused scan of policies, guidelines, and legislation that govern the practice of MAiD in Alberta, Canada (N = 16). Drawing from rural health scholarship, we reviewed these documents with a focus on three key rural considerations (place, community, and relationships) and identified potential implications. Through an analysis of these findings, we identified four opportunities where policy can better serve rural communities. These included addressing geographic location, continuity of care, dual relationships, and systemic barriers. In light of this, we offer several recommendations for how future policy and guidelines can better support rural residents.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".