Moderators of cancer‐related distress and worry after a pancreatic cancer genetic counseling and screening intervention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Although the hereditary breast and ovarian cancer literature has demonstrated short-term gains in psychological adjustment following genetic counseling, there has been limited research examining long-term outcomes and moderators. Moreover, there has been minimal research into the psychological effects of this intervention in populations at high risk for pancreatic cancer. This study examines the long-term effects of pancreatic cancer screening and genetic counseling on cancer-related distress and cancer worry in a high-risk population at 1-year follow-up. Additionally, this study explores potential moderators of the effectiveness of this intervention. METHODS: One hundred twenty-nine participants with familial pancreatic cancer or with the BRCA2 gene mutation completed a baseline questionnaire prior to their first pancreatic cancer screening and genetic counseling session. Participants also completed questionnaires at 3- and 12-month follow-up. RESULTS: Cancer-related intrusive thoughts decreased significantly over time, whereas cancer-related worry decreased at 3 months and showed a small but significant increase at 1 year. Age and baseline distress exhibited moderator effects. Younger individuals showed a significant decrease in cancer-related intrusive thoughts, cancer-related avoidant thoughts, and cancer worry. Additionally, individuals with greater baseline distress showed a significant decrease in cancer-related intrusive thoughts over time. CONCLUSIONS: Analysis of the long-term effects of pancreatic cancer screening and genetic testing reveal psychological gains that are maintained at 1-year follow-up. This intervention is particularly effective for younger participants and individuals with greater baseline distress.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".