Abstract P4-12-12: Assessing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer treatment decision-making and care experiences
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract BACKGROUND: While the COVID-19 pandemic has reshaped how oncology is practiced, we sought to understand itseffects on treatment decision-making and care experiences amongst cancer patients at the Tom BakerCancer Centre in Calgary, Canada. METHODS: A 24 item, cross-sectional survey was developed based on literature review and iterative feedback fromoncology physicians, nurses, and a patient advisor. Survey domains included fear of COVID-19 andperceived risk, uptake of COVID-19 public health measures, cancer treatment decision-making duringthe pandemic, and cancer care experiences during the pandemic. Demographic, cancer and treatment-related information was obtained from the electronic medical record for patients who consented andcompleted the survey. In the first quarter of 2021, 161 patients accrued including 44 breast cancerpatients. The cohort characteristics and survey responses were summarized using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: For the 44 participants with breast cancer, all were female and the median age was 59 years (range 35-83 years). Our breast cancer cohort was almost evenly split between those with stage I-III (45.5%) andthose with metastatic disease (54.5%). Time since diagnosis was as follows: less than 1 year (17patients), 1-3 years (10 patients), 3-5 years (5 patients), and more than 5 years (9 patients). Treatmentsreceived since declaration of the pandemic included: surgery (21 patients), radiation (17 patients),chemotherapy (25 patients), endocrine therapy (25 patients), and other systemic therapies such as boneand anti-HER2 agents (15 patients). Just over half of the participants (54.5%) agreed or strongly agreedthat they were at increased risk of contracting COVID19; however, fewer patients expressed beinguncomfortable thinking about COVID-19 (45.4%), afraid of COVID-19 (38.6%), or fearful of dying fromCOVID19 (31.8%). The vast majority (>93%) of patients followed public health recommendations formitigating the risk of contracting COVID-19 (i.e. masking, frequent hand washing/sanitization, and socialdistancing) and 70.4% expressed a willingness to receive the vaccine when available. Of therespondents, 19 had undergone testing for COVID-19 at least once and 3 tested positive. Only 2 patientsreported that their surgical course was altered due to the pandemic and no patients declinedtreatments or perceived delays or modifications in therapies otherwise. Of 25 breast participants whohad experienced a cancer-related telehealth appointment during the pandemic, 21 (84%) agreed orstrongly agreed with being satisfied with the encounter. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic caused minimal perceived disruption to care amongst a small cohort of breastcancer patients being treated at our centre. While experience with a cancer-related telehealthappointment was not universal, our findings support acceptability of its use. Citation Format: Noura Alsafar, Desiree Hao, Nimira Alimohamed, Sunil Samnani, Sasha Lupichuk. Assessing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer treatment decision-making and care experiences [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2021 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2021 Dec 7-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P4-12-12.
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 | 0,007 | 0,020 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 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 ».