Place of Death and Place of Care at the End of Life: Are They Correlated? A Retrospective Cohort Study of Ontario Decedents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background:Dying in nonpalliative acute care is generally considered inappropriate and avoidable. Place of death, a commonly reported big-dot indicator of end-of-life care quality, is often used as a proxy for place of care despite no empirical evidence for their correlations. Thus, we examined the correlations between place of death and place of care in the last month of life. We also investigated anecdotal claims that individuals cared in acute care often get discharged to die at home, and vice versa. Methods:We conducted a retrospective cohort study of Ontario decedents (18+) who died between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2017. We identified individuals who died in nonpalliative acute care, palliative care unit, subacute care, long-term care (LTC), and the community. We calculated the number of days decedents spent in each setting in their last month of life, and used descriptive analyses to investigate their correlations. Results:Decedent's place of death generally correlated with their place of care in the last month of life—individuals who died in a particular setting spent more time in that setting than individuals who died elsewhere. Furthermore, 75.0% of individuals who spent more than two weeks of their last month in acute care died in acute care. Among individuals who died in the community and in LTC, 65.4% and 75.0%, respectively, spent zero days in acute care. Interpretation:We showed that place of death can be a useful high-level performance indicator, by itself and as a proxy for place of care, to gauge end-of-life quality and service provision/implementation.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: yes | Observational | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: yes · About a Canadian topic: yes | Observational | high |
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".