MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1978708624 · doi:10.1002/pon.938

Public policy, human consequences: the gap between biomedicine and psychosocial reality

2005· article· en· W1978708624 on OpenAlexafffund
Robert Y. McMurtry, Barry D. Bultz

Bibliographic record

VenuePsycho-Oncology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryWestern University
FundersHealth Canada
KeywordsPsychosocialDistressBiomedicineEmotional distressHealth carePublic policyPublic healthPsychologyMedicineNursingPolitical scienceClinical psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite evidence-based research demonstrating the high prevalence rates of emotional distress, medical systems continue to focus their attention on biomedical aspects of treatment leaving a significant gap in patient care. This paper reflects on values and policy and suggests that we are unlikely to change health care systems unless we routinely address comprehensive aspects of the patient's experience. If we do not measure indicators of emotional distress, we risk not responding to this significant aspect of the cancer experience. The key message to health care providers here is: what we measure is what we act upon.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.717
Threshold uncertainty score0.571

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.155
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations16
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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