Undergraduate Students’ Attitudes Towards Medical Assistance in Dying for Mental Illness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Seventy-one undergraduate students took part in a study examining their attitudes toward medical assistance in dying (MAiD) for mental illness. More than half (52%) of the students did not know that a change to Canada's MAiD law will allow people with a mental illness as their sole underlying condition to request a medically assisted death next spring (ie, March, 2024). Less than a one-third (28%) of the students agreed/strongly agreed with the statement that MAiD should be offered to people receiving treatment for mental illness (42% disagreed/strongly disagreed), and even less (14%) agreed/strongly agreed with the statement that people waiting for treatment for mental illness should be able to access MAiD (71% disagreed/strongly disagreed). In explaining their answers to the second statement, over two-thirds (68%) of the students believed that people who are waiting to be treated for mental illness should receive treatment first, before considering MAiD. In other words, undergoing treatment for mental illness that might work was seen as a better option than dying.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".