MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404292078 · doi:10.1136/bmjoq-2024-002798

Increasing resuscitation status-related goals of care discussions for older adults with severe mental illness in a Canadian mental health setting: a retrospective study

2024· article· en· W4404292078 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Cristina de Lasa, Elnathan Mesfin, Tania Tajirian, Caroline Chessex, Brian Lo, Sanjeev Sockalingam

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open Quality · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, University of TorontoUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
KeywordsDocumentationContext (archaeology)MedicineCardiopulmonary resuscitationDo not resuscitateResuscitationMedical recordEmergency medicineMental healthMedical emergencyPsychiatrySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Older adults with severe mental illness, including advanced dementia (AD), within geriatric admission units (GAU) often prioritise comfort care, avoiding life-prolonging procedures including cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). Pre-2019, hospital policy lacked a resuscitation status order (RSO) incorporating distinct do-not-resuscitate levels. Providers entered 'NO CPR' orders in the electronic health record (EHR), necessitating transfers for non-CPR medical issues, contradicting patient preferences. METHODS: The study aimed for a 75% increase in resuscitation status-related (RSR) goals of care discussion (GOCD) completion rates within 1 week of GAU admission or transfer by December 2022. We implemented an EHR RSO, updated hospital policy and provided staff education. A 4-year GAU retrospective chart review assessed RSR GOCD frequency, completion time, documentation quality and discrepancies. Additionally, an environmental scan identified contributing factors to RSR GOCD. RESULTS: Among 431 reviewed charts, the mean RSR GOCD completion rate was 13.9%; taking 39.5 days, with extreme outliers removed, the mean of time to completion was 15 days. Subgroup analysis highlighted a significant difference in RSR GOCD completion rates for AD (41.6%) compared with non-AD patients (16.3%). Discrepancy rates in charts with RSR GOCD were substantial: documentation without a corresponding RSO (66.7%), RSO without documentation (26.1%) and discordant resuscitation status between documentation and RSO (7.2%). Documentation quality varied: 32.9% lacked context, 20.7% had limited context, while 46.3% provided comprehensive context. Barriers to RSR GOCD included the absence of an EHR documentation tool and clear triggers. CONCLUSION: RSR GOCD completion rates were lower and took longer than anticipated, highlighting improvement opportunities. AD subgroup analysis indicated provider awareness of RSR GOCD importance in this population. Discrepancies and documentation quality issues pose risks to patient-centred care. Collaborative stakeholder efforts are imperative for developing system-based informatics solutions, ensuring timely, comprehensive and patient-centred RSR GOCD.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.452

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.496
Teacher spread0.418 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open QualitySame topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207