MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389455370 · doi:10.1111/capa.12546

Naturalizing dying at home for older adults: A critical analysis of policy texts

2023· article· en· W4389455370 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Erin Scott, Laura Funk, Maria Cherba, Marian Krawczyk, Andrea Rounce, Kelli Stajduhar, S. Robin Cohen

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Public Administration · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of OttawaUniversity of ManitobaManitoba Health
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRhetoricTransparency (behavior)NarrativePublic policyIdeal (ethics)Public administrationPublic relationsSociologyPolitical sciencePublic opinionLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Public policy initiatives, opinion surveys, and public rhetoric in Canada suggest people wish to die at home. Discourse analysis of statements, policies, reports, and websites of municipal, provincial, and federal governments show how public policy narratives reflect specific understandings of dying at home. Dying is positioned as best kept within the private “home” space. Though frequently framed as a choice, subtle rhetoric also prioritizes home as the ideal place for care at the end of life, and death. Home death preferences are naturalized as common‐sense. Along with more nuance in policy communications, transparency in how evidence informs policy is needed.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.048
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.078
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.884
Threshold uncertainty score0.843

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0480.078
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0130.013
Science and technology studies0.0360.045
Scholarly communication0.0190.011
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0050.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Public AdministrationSame topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207