MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4327558228 · doi:10.1097/pra.0000000000000692

A Leg to Stand On: Working With Marginal Decision-making Capacity in a Patient With a Severe Leg Infection and Schizophrenia

2023· review· en· W4327558228 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Psychiatric Practice · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHealthcare Decision-Making and Restraints
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)AmputationTask (project management)MedicineIntervention (counseling)DeliriumMental illnessPsychiatryIntensive care medicinePsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Assessment of a patient's capacity to make treatment decisions and working with the wishes of a patient with mental illness against the best medically indicated plan is a complex and dynamic task. It is particularly challenging when the course of deterioration of the illness is meandering and slow, and the time horizon for recovery is uncertain, providing no clear point of entry for definitive crisis intervention. High-impact decisions concerning body integrity, such as the amputation of a leg, further complicate the task. To highlight these challenges and complexities, we present the case of a man who suffered from schizophrenia, with a worsening diabetic foot ulcer and suboptimal acceptance of proper wound care. The patient died as a result of his refusal of a proposed amputation to address his life-threatening infection. Medical system and cultural issues are also considered.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.981
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.309 · 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