MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4403531912 · doi:10.54932/oaem2692

Utilisation et coûts des soins et services de santé durant la dernière année de vie

2024· report· fr· W4403531912 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Delphine Bosson-Rieutort, Sébastien Barbat‐Artigas, Juliette Duc, Yuliya Bodryzlova, Fereshteh Mehrabi, Erin Strumpf

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth, Medicine and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les personnes de 65 ans et plus représenteront le quart de la population québécoise en 2031. Ce changement démographique majeur soulève des inquiétudes et défis importants en ce qui concerne l’organisation des soins de santé. La prévalence de la multiplicité des maladies chroniques est en augmentation depuis plusieurs années et elle augmente avec l’âge. Durant les dernières années de vie, cette population vieillissante risque de présenter une augmentation de problèmes de santé multiples, nécessitant des besoins et recours aux soins de plus en plus complexes et coûteux. Le système de santé et de services sociaux devra alors ajuster continuellement son offre de services afin de répondre à ces besoins changeants. Dans cette étude, les auteurs utilisent des données clinico-administratives afin de reconstruire les trajectoires de recours aux soins durant la dernière année de vie des personnes qui avaient plus de 65 ans au moment du décès puis estimer le coût individuel associé à l’utilisation des services de santé et services sociaux selon l’âge, le sexe, la région sociosanitaire et la cause de décès. L’étude a été réalisée dans le cadre d’un partenariat entre l’École de santé publique de l’Université de Montréal (ESPUM) et l’Institut national d’excellence en santé et services sociaux (INESSS).

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.831
Threshold uncertainty score0.339

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.108
GPT teacher head0.475
Teacher spread0.367 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHealth, Medicine and Society→French-language works237,207→