Day surgery and recovery in women with a suspicious breast lesion: Evaluation of a psychoeducational nursing intervention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study assessed whether a nursing intervention based on self-regulation theory, the Attentional Focus and Symptom Management Intervention (AFSMI), could help women who underwent day surgery for breast cancer to achieve better pain management and decreased emotional distress. The sample consisted of 117 patients with breast cancer who were outpatients and undergoing surgery as part of the initial treatment for their cancer. All subjects were interviewed at three different occasions. The subjects were randomized into the experimental group (n = 61) or the usual care group (control, n = 56). The subjects in the experimental group received the intervention in two sessions, 3-4 days and 10-11 days after surgery. The outcomes were the subjects' pain and emotional distress. Results showed significant differences between the experimental and control group at post-test on home management, total mood disturbance, confusion and tension scores implying that the intervention was effective in achieving these outcomes. Clinical significance has illustrated that a nursing intervention applied during immediate recovery of breast cancer surgery is quite clinically relevant to reduce emotional distress. Self-regulation theory could effectively be used as a guide in developing nursing intervention programs in practice for patients with cancer undergoing day surgery as a primary 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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".