MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981725031 · doi:10.1188/08.cjon.749-755

Uncertainty After Treatment for Prostate Cancer: Definition, Assessment, and Management

2008· article· en· W1981725031 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical journal of oncology nursing · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods in Clinical Trials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersCentre National d’Etudes SpatialesOncology Nursing SocietyAmerican Cancer Society
KeywordsMedicineProstate cancerIntensive care medicineProstateCancerManagement of prostate cancerMedical physicsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prostate cancer is the second most common type of cancer in men living in the United States and the most common type of malignancy in Canadian men, accounting for 186,320 new cases in the United States and 24,700 in Canada in 2008. Uncertainty, a component of all illness experiences, influences how men perceive the processes of treatment and adaptation. The Reconceptualized Uncertainty in Illness Theory explains the chronic nature of uncertainty in cancer survivorship by describing a shift from an emergent acute phase of uncertainty in survivors to a new level of uncertainty that is no longer acute and becomes a part of daily life. Proper assessment of certainty and uncertainty may allow nurses to maximize the effectiveness of patient-provider communication, cognitive reframing, and problem-solving interventions to reduce uncertainty after cancer treatment.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.923
Threshold uncertainty score0.628

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.684
GPT teacher head0.662
Teacher spread0.022 · 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