Corrigendum: Medical Assistance in Dying in Quebec: A Continuum Between Teams’ Accountability and Interdisciplinary Support Groups’ Assumption of Responsibility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Corrigendum: MEDICAL ASSISTANCE IN DYING IN QUEBEC: A CONTINUUM BETWEEN TEAMS’ ACCOUNTABILITY AND INTERDISCIPLINARY SUPPORT GROUPS’ ASSUPTION OF RESPONSIBILITYCatherine Perron1, 2Eric Racine 2, 3, 4Marie-Eve Bouthillier 1, 21 Centre intégré de santé et de services sociaux de Laval, Laval, QC, Canada Laval, QC, Canada2 Department of Medicine, Montreal University, Montréal, QC, Canada3 Montreal Clinical Research Institute (IRCM), Montreal, QC, Canada4 Department of Medicine, McGill University, Montréal, QC, Canada* Correspondence: Marie-Eve Bouthillier : bouthillier@me.comKeywords: medical assistance in dying, coordination, support structures, values, pragmatic ethicsMissing FundingIn the original article, we neglected to include the funder **Research Institutes of Canada**, **EG4 179448** to **Marie-Eve Bouthillier**. The authors apologize for this error and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.Additional Affiliation(s)In the published article, there was an error regarding the affiliation for **Eric Racine**. As well as having affiliation(s) **3, 4 **, he should also have **2**. The authors apologize for this error and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.
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 | 0.004 | 0.073 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.040 | 0.016 |
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".