MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1952443764 · doi:10.1556/oh.2014.29849

Psychosocial status of Hungarian cancer patients. A descriptive study

2014· article· en· W1952443764 on OpenAlexaff
Magda Rohánszky, Rózsa Katonai, Barna Konkolÿ Thege

Bibliographic record

VenueOrvosi Hetilap · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychosocialMedicineCoping (psychology)Social supportPopulationAnxietyDepression (economics)Mental healthQuality of life (healthcare)CancerPsychiatryPsychologyInternal medicineEnvironmental healthPsychotherapistNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Psychosocial status of cancer patients is still understudied in Hungary. AIM: The aim of the authors was to obtain current information on the mental and social status of this patient group. METHOD: Altogether, 1070 cancer patients with a wide range of cancer types were included in the study (30.0% male; age: 55.9 ± 11.0 years). RESULTS: A large part of the patients had serious financial difficulties and 41.3% of them were struggling with at least one more comorbid chronic disease. Further, 52.2% of the patients reported at least moderate anxiety or depression, while the occurrence of suicidal thoughts was almost three times higher among them than in the Hungarian normal population (13.0% vs. 4.6%). Level of perceived social support was also lower than the population standards and 61.6% of the patients reported willingness to benefit from professional psychological support. Quality of social life of the patients deteriorated with time after cancer diagnosis. A positive phenomenon, however, was that the primary coping style reported was active problem solving. CONCLUSIONS: The authors conclude that it is necessary to screen cancer patients for psychosocial difficulties and to establish conditions for their adequate mental and social care in Hungary.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Citations7
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrvosi HetilapSame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207