MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7117245737 · doi:10.2196/75082

Virtual, Nurse-Led Early Primary Palliative Care Intervention (ELICIT) for Community-Dwelling Older Adults With Cognitive Impairment: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

2025· article· en· W7117245737 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Vyjeyanthi S. Periyakoil, Charles von Gunten, Helena Kraemer

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute on Aging
KeywordsPalliative careIntervention (counseling)Randomized controlled trialCognitionPrimary careProtocol (science)Scope (computer science)Cognitive Intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Although dementia is a serious illness that progresses over many years, little is known about the primary palliative care needs of individuals who have it, especially those living in the community. Objective: This trial aims to test the impact of a virtual, nurse-led early primary palliative care intervention (ELICIT) on older adults living in the community who are chronically ill and have a diagnosis of cognitive impairment or are at risk of it. Methods: A total of 200 community-dwelling older adults who were chronically ill and had varying degrees of cognitive impairment were recruited and randomized to either usual care or usual care + a virtual, nurse-led ELICIT. For both arms, we will track the number of participants who (1) report supportive care needs to the blinded evaluators and (2) complete conversations on goals of care and document advance directives and the Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment form in the electronic health record. We will also track their end-of-life resource use and the percentage of participants who receive goal-concordant care. Changes in Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale, Patient Activation Measure, and Quality of Life in Alzheimer's Disease scores will be tracked and analyzed. Results: As of October 2025, we have recruited 200 participants. We are following all study participants on an ongoing basis to determine whether they received goal-concordant care at the end of life and their resource use patterns. We hypothesize that, compared to the usual care arm, more participants in the intervention arm will (1) express supportive care needs to the blinded evaluators, (2) complete goals of care conversations, document advance care planning, and (3) have higher levels of goal-concordant care and lower end-of-life resource use. Conclusions: The identification of the primary palliative care needs of community-dwelling older adults who are chronically ill and have various levels of cognitive impairment will help refine the intervention and enable trained nurses to provide virtual early primary palliative care within the scope of nursing.

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.235

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0070.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.006
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0070.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0700.011

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 head0.179
GPT teacher head0.574
Teacher spread0.394 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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 venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues→French-language works237,207→