Feasibility and reliability of the revised Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS-r) in Egyptian patients with advanced cancer: A single institutional experience
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Objective This study aims to test the acceptance, feasibility, and usefulness of the Arabic version of the revised Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS-r) among Egyptian patients with advanced cancer and to compare the rates of symptoms documented by patients and physicians. Methods Between August 2014 and February 2015, a total of 140 patients at Ain Shams University Hospitals in Cairo, Egypt received the Arabic version of the ESAS-r. For each patient, the ESAS-r was completed twice, first by the treating physician (as part of the basic assessment) and a second time by the patient, with a maximum of 2 hours between the two assessments. An additional survey was included to assess patients’ acceptance of the survey and their preferences. Results Out of 140 enrolled patients in the study, 11 patients refused to complete the questionnaire, and 10 patients were excluded due to incomplete records in their medical records. Complete data was retrieved for 119 patients who were included for further analyses. The 78 (65%) patients declared that the test was clear and easy to complete. They were able to answer the test without help. Collectively, tiredness and sense of well-being were the most commonly encountered symptoms in ratings obtained by both patients and physicians. Tiredness was the only symptom showing a significant difference between the two rating methods, patient-rated scores being higher (P = 0.032). Cronbach’s alpha showed that both tests completed by the physician and the patients were internally consistent: the physician-rated test had a coefficient of 0.877, and the patient-rated test had a coefficient of 0.863. All ESAS scores had good internal consistency, with a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.88. The internal consistency remained high after removal of individual symptom scores, with Cronbach’s alpha coefficients ranging from 0.823 to 0.902, indicating that no individual question had undue influence on the total ESAS score. Conclusion The ESAS-r was easily understood by and applicable to patients. There was no significant discrepancy in the rates of symptoms reported by the patients and physicians, apart from tiredness. Based on this, the test could be applied on a larger scale with in-home patients. This test can be cost-effective and can decrease the number of hospital visits among advanced cancer patients in need of supportive treatment rather than active cancer therapy.
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 | 0,005 | 0,011 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
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 ».