MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319843352 · doi:10.29173/pandpr29411

Meaning of Caring for Someone Dying in ICU

2023· article· en· W4319843352 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Pilar Camargo‐Plazas

Bibliographic record

VenuePhenomenology & Practice · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeaning (existential)PsychologyNursingMedicinePsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The mystery of death is part of the enigma of life itself. In nursing, being next to someone dying makes us more aware of our strengths and limitations while caring for someone who walks into the unknown. As nurses, we are affected by these experiences, so how do we deal with them? What is the essence of caring for someone dying in the ICU? What makes each experience unique? Through the experience of being with someone as they are dying, we discover our limits, our finiteness. We cannot deny death’s disruptive and silent spirit that embodies us, yet death, like other aspects of life, is unique; it appears to teach us that life goes on, that life cannot wait for us.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.428
Threshold uncertainty score0.365

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.208
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.252 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhenomenology & PracticeSame topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207