Baseline practice-level financial screening processes and resources among Children’s Oncology Group National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Programs (NCORP).
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
34 Background: Financial toxicity is an increasingly recognized and prevalent adverse effect during cancer treatment. Systematic financial screening is recommended for families of children with cancer, and emerging data support the importance of system-level support and interventions to mitigate financial toxicity. Financial distress is a key, measurable domain of financial toxicity. Methods: To inform interventions for pediatric oncology settings, we are conducting ACCL20N1CD, a Children’s Oncology Group (COG) prospective, multilevel observational study among NCORP practices in the US, to determine the risk and trajectory for financial distress in guardians of children with newly diagnosed acute lymphoblastic leukemia. We analyzed baseline survey data from COG NCORP practices that enrolled at least one parent. Data were collected via REDCap following the practice’s first parent enrollment. We describe practice participation patterns, current approaches to financial screening, and available resources to address identified needs including navigation. Results: Of 50 eligible COG NCORP practices, 40 (80%) activated the study, and 28 (56%) enrolled at least 1 participant and thus, completed the survey. Most (61%) of these practices treated 50-99 new pediatric oncology patients annually; 10 (36%) enrolled at least 5 participants in ACCL20N1CD. Twenty (71%) reported that their practice routinely conducted financial screening in addition to insurance assessment; 15 (75%) of these 20 practices conducted financial screening at more than one timepoint. Social workers were primarily responsible for screening (16/20; 80%). Only three practices (3/28; 11%) used a standardized financial screening tool. Most practices had access to a private foundation/organization (25/28, 89%), institutional support (23/28, 82%), or local referrals to organizations (22/28, 78%) that provided financial support for patients/families. Fewer practices had patient navigators (9/28, 32%), financial navigators (8/28, 28%), or legal advocates (3/28, 11%) available to assist families. Conclusions: Though most COG practices treating children of parents enrolled in 20N1CD conduct financial screening, processes are not standardized, and resources available to address identified needs and potentially mitigate financial toxicity vary. Further, these data represent enrolling sites which may overestimate screening practices within COG NCORP practices. Variations in financial screening procedures and lack of individual-level resources to facilitate screening may impact delivery of equitable high-quality cancer care across NCORP COG practices. Clinical trial information: NCT04928599 .
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,016 | 0,029 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,005 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 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 tête enseignante, 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 ».