Psychobiological correlates of communication skills use and learning: Preliminary results
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose A clinical pathway for anxiety and depression in adult cancer patients was developed to guide best practice in Australia. Methods The pathway was based on a rapid review of existing guidelines, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, stakeholder interviews, a Delphi process with 87 multi-disciplinary stakeholders and input from a multidisciplinary advisory panel. Results The pathway recommends formalised routine screening for anxiety and depression in patients with cancer at key points in the patient’s journey. The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) or Distress Thermometer (DT) with problem checklist are recommended as brief screening tools, combined with a more detailed tool, such as the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), to identify possible cases. A structured clinical interview will be required to confirm diagnosis. When anxiety or depression is identified it is recommended one person in a treating team takes responsibility for co-ordinating appropriate assessment, referral and follow-up (not necessarily carrying these out themselves). A stepped care model of intervention is proposed, beginning with the least intensive available that is still likely to provide significant health gain. The exact intervention, treatment length and follow up timelines as well as professionals involved, are provided as a guide only. Each service should identify their own referral network based on local resources and current service structure, as well as patient preference. Discussion This clinical pathway will assist cancer services to design their own systems to detect and manage anxiety and depression in their patients, to improve the quality of care.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it