Geriatric Assessment: ASCO Global Guideline
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
ASCO Guidelines provide recommendations with comprehensive review and analyses of the relevant literature for each recommendation, following the guideline development process as outlined in the ASCO Guidelines Methodology Manual , ASCO Guidelines follow the ASCO Conflict of Interest Policy for Clinical Practice Guidelines . Clinical Practice Guidelines and other guidance (“Guidance”) provided by ASCO is not a comprehensive or definitive guide to treatment options. It is intended for voluntary use by clinicians and should be used in conjunction with independent professional judgment. Guidance may not be applicable to all patients, interventions, diseases or stages of diseases. Guidance is based on review and analysis of relevant literature, and is not intended as a statement of the standard of care. ASCO does not endorse third-party drugs, devices, services, or therapies and assumes no responsibility for any harm arising from or related to the use of this information. See complete disclaimer in Appendix 1 for more. PURPOSE To guide clinicians and policymakers in global resource-constrained settings to assess the geriatric needs of patients older than 65 years with cancer when Maximal-setting guideline–recommended resources are unavailable. METHODS A multidisciplinary, multinational Expert Panel reviewed existing ASCO guidelines and conducted modified ADAPTE and formal consensus processes. RESULTS An ASCO resource-neutral guideline was adapted for resource-constrained settings, informing one round of formal consensus; recommendations received ≥75% agreement. RECOMMENDATIONS The Expert Panel endorses the Maximal-setting guideline's overarching recommendation that end users utilize geriatric assessment (GA), including essential domains, to identify “vulnerabilities or impairments not routinely captured in oncology assessment for all older patients over 65 years old with cancer.” All care plans for patients with cancer over 65 years old receiving systemic therapy with GA-identified deficits should include GA-guided management. A geriatric evaluation should at a minimum include the use of a brief geriatric screening tool. Tools in the Practical Geriatric Assessment (PGA) are validated in multiple languages, but users may use more appropriate tools in some settings and languages, if they include the relevant guideline-specified domains. Maximal-resource settings of high-income countries have traditionally developed cutoffs for GA-identified deficits, but locally validated research and practice may inform differing cutoffs. If validated all-cause mortality prognosis tools do not adequately represent the setting, clinicians may use actuarial life-expectancy tables with quartiles of overall health status. Additional information can be found at www.asco.org/global-guidelines . It is the view of ASCO that health care clinicians and health care system decision makers should be guided by the recommendations for the highest stratum of resources available. The guideline is intended to complement but not replace local guidelines.
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 | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| 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 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 ».