MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410202373 · doi:10.7202/1117879ar

Why Not Advance Directives for MAID in Those with Dementia?

2025· article· en· W4410202373 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Michael Gordon

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Bioethics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaMEDLINEBusinessComputer scienceMedicinePolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The numbers of individuals with Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias are growing rapidly in North America and the rest of the western world. In most jurisdictions there is a major societal challenge to provide appropriate care for these individuals as well as their families. At present in North America, it is not possible for a person with dementia, while anticipating the declining trajectory of their disabling illness, to indicate to their substitute decision makers (SDM or proxies in the USA) a request for medical assistance in dying (MAID). This is the case even if at the time of making the request the person is legally capable of taking such a decision using the criteria for MAID in other clinical situations. The question is why a person with Alzheimer’s disease or other causes of dementia should not be able to anticipate their decline while still capable. And if so, to instruct their designated decision-maker to request and obtain MAID, their indicated preference in a legal advance directive.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.859
Threshold uncertainty score0.911

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.145
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of BioethicsSame topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207