MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1509229696 · doi:10.1002/pon.3943

Associations of prognostic awareness/acceptance with psychological distress, existential suffering, and quality of life in terminally ill cancer patients' last year of life

2015· article· en· W1509229696 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Siew Tzuh Tang, Wen‐Cheng Chang, Jen‐Shi Chen, Wen‐Chi Chou, Chia‐Hsun Hsieh, Chen H. Chen

Bibliographic record

VenuePsycho-Oncology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Health Research InstitutesNational Science CouncilMcGill University
KeywordsQuality of life (healthcare)AnxietyClinical psychologyDeath anxietyCancerDistressMedicineExistentialismLogistic regressionTerminally illDepression (economics)PsychologyPalliative carePsychiatryPsychotherapistInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Whether prognostic awareness benefits terminally ill cancer patients' psychological-existential well-being and quality of life (QOL) is unclear because of lack of well-controlled longitudinal studies. This study longitudinally evaluated the associations of accurate prognostic awareness and prognostic acceptance with psychological distress, existential suffering, and QOL while comprehensively controlling for confounders in Taiwanese terminally ill cancer patients' last year of life. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A convenience sample of 325 cancer patients was followed until death. Psychological distress and existential suffering were assessed by severe anxiety and depressive symptoms and high self-perceived sense of burden to others, respectively. Dichotomized and continuous (QOL) outcome variables were evaluated by multivariate logistic and linear regression modeling with the generalized estimating equation, respectively. RESULTS: Accurate prognostic awareness was not associated with the likelihood of severe anxiety or depressive symptoms but significantly increased the likelihood of high self-perceived sense of burden to others and was associated with poorer QOL in participants' last year of life. Participants who knew and highly accepted their prognosis were significantly less likely to experience severe anxiety symptoms than those who were unaware of or knew their prognosis but had difficulty accepting it. CONCLUSION: Knowing one's poor prognosis and confronting one's impending death without full acceptance and adequate professional psycho-spiritual support may harm more than benefit terminally ill cancer patients' psychological state, existential well-being, and QOL. These findings highlight the importance of tailoring psycho-spiritual support to cancer patients' psychological and existential needs when prognostic information is disclosed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.074
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.318 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations99
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsycho-OncologySame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207