Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.044 | 0.163 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.015 | 0.024 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
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".