Peer support groups for prostate cancer in Australia: a snapshot in 2002
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Over the last decade, peer support programs for men with prostate cancer have been reported in North America and Canada (Us Too and Man to Man), and in British Columbia (Prostate Support and Awareness). Such groups have also emerged across Australia, and more recently these groups affiliated with the Prostate Cancer Foundation of Australia (PCFA) as the Support and Advocacy Committee. Forty four groups exist under the umbrella of the PCFA. with each Australian state and territory represented. To date, however, empirical data has not been gathered on the activities of these groups. This report describes the first stage of a three-phase project to examine the current activities of these groups, how they assist men with prostate cancer, and consequently determine future program development needs. In all, 41 group leaders were surveyed (93% response). Group membership consisted mostly of men who had been diagnosed with prostate cancer, with an estimated 3,300 men currently members. Groups were predominantly peer supervised. Other types of overall management and group facilitation were health professionals, and a shared role between a man who had had prostate cancer and a health professional. The mean time of group operation was four years and five months. The main sources of support for groups were local state councils and hospitals who 'provided assistance such as meeting rooms, photocopying and postage, a 'health professional to facilitate meetings, special training for members, and funds. Three groups described receiving no support from any source. The main activities undertaken by groups were general discussion meetings, group education sessions with guest lecturers, regular newsletters, and one to one telephone support by members with no special training. Group leaders described doctors as referring men to their groups "sometimes" and as working "somewhat closely" with their groups. Working with doctors helped groups by providing expert information and advice to them, acting as a source of referral to and promotion for groups, and adding professionalism and credibility to them. In all, 63% of participants described wanting to work more closely with doctors in these ways. A key difficulty described by group leaders was that the responsibility for managing the group often fell to the same individuals, with difficulties experienced in recruiting other members to take on leadership roles in the group. The present study demonstrates the depth of activity in peer support for prostate cancer in Australia and suggests that work to develop further collaborative relationships between these groups and health professionals may be needed. Prostate cancer support groups express a desire to work more closely with health professionals, and in particular doctors such as urologists and radiation oncologists. Further work to build on this preliminary study is in progress.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».