Abstract PO-016: Evaluating the impact of COVID-19 on medical oncology workforce and cancer care in Canada: A serial survey study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background: The first case of COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2, C19) was reported to Health Canada on Jan 25th, 2020. By March 18th, states of emergency were declared across multiple provinces. The pandemic has presented professional and personal challenges for the medical oncology workforce and cancer care. Under the auspices of the Canadian Association of Medical Oncology (CAMO), we sought to examine the temporal effects of C19 on medical oncologists and care practices across Canada. Methods: Two serial multiple-choice, web-based national surveys were conducted in 2020—from March 30th to April 4th (S1) and May 6th to May 15th, 2020 (S2). The surveys were distributed by email to medical oncologists identified through CAMO and the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons Medical Oncology directory (n=618). Participation was voluntary with no compensation. Descriptive analyses with frequency distributions are reported. Results: A total of 157 completed responses were received for S1 and 159 responses for S2 (25% response rate). Demographics were similar between S1/S2: from comprehensive cancer centre (87%/86%), greater than 15 years in practice (41%/46%), CAMO member (60%/65%). Moderate to extreme concern of C19 exposure decreased over time for self (79%/54%), for family (82%/65%), and for patient (pt) (71%/54%). Routine use of PPE increased (67%/100%) with less concern around PPE access (69%/28%). Frequent anxiety (54%/32%) and depression (19%/14%) lessened while frequent lack of interest (18%/17%) and lack of focus (33%/31%) were unchanged. Use of telemedicine for >50% of pts remained high (82%/86%), and confidence in adequate health care access for pts increased (39%/59%). Centre accrual activity to clinical trials increased (46%/67%). Change in chemotherapy for >20% of pts was reported infrequently (33%/23%). Cancer prognosis and treatment benefit remained the primary determinant in treatment decision-making (rank score: 7.50/7.95) while resource access (6.19/5.68) and pt risk of C19 (6.05/5.72) became less important. Conclusions: As the pandemic curve flattens and Canadian medical oncologists adjust to a new normal, positive trends can be observed in concerns around C19 exposure, frequency of anxiety and depression, concerns about PPE access, confidence in health care access, and accrual to clinical trials. Chemotherapy plans remained unchanged for the majority of pts. A high rate of early adoption of telemedicine was observed and maintained. Serial follow-up is valuable to understand changing perceptions and practices. Citation Format: Sharlene Gill, Bruce Colwell, Hal Hirte, Welch Stephen, Alexi Campbell, Desiree Hao. Evaluating the impact of COVID-19 on medical oncology workforce and cancer care in Canada: A serial survey study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Virtual Meeting: COVID-19 and Cancer; 2020 Jul 20-22. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2020;26(18_Suppl):Abstract nr PO-016.
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 | 0,007 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 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 ».