The impact and management of cancer-related fatigue on patients and families
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fatigue has been identified as both a chronic and recurrent problem for individuals diagnosed with and treated for cancer, yet there is little information on how to manage the impact of fatigue. Describing what happens to individuals and their families as a result of fatigue and identifying what individuals do to manage or reduce the impact of fatigue are essential elements in determining multidimensional nursing interventions. The purpose of this pilot study was to examine the impact of fatigue on individuals with cancer of the lung and their families, and explore how they managed as a result of the fatigue. A semi-structured interview guide was used with 22 lung cancer patients and 14 family members six weeks post completion of radiation therapy. Results indicated that fatigue was not reported as a major concern by many of the participants in this study. For those who did experience fatigue, it was considered an inconvenience and a frustration that had to be dealt with for a limited time period. Some patients appeared to gradually adjust and accommodate to the fatigue and were not really aware of the changes that took place over time. Over half of the family members felt more of the impact of fatigue than did their loved ones. Family subtly assumed or took over responsibilities and activities the patient could no longer perform. The symptom of fatigue has been well documented in the cancer experience as both a chronic and recurrent problem for individuals diagnosed with and treated for cancer. The emphasis of previous work has been on deriving a conceptual definition of fatigue, achieving consensus on a definition, and developing theoretical frameworks to guide further study of this complex construct. Fatigue has been conceptualized as a multidimensional phenomenon, attributable to multiple causes and having a negative effect on quality of life (Piper, 1993; Tiesinga, Dasson, & Halfens, 1996). Describing what happens to individuals and their families as a result of fatigue and identifying what individuals do to manage or reduce the effects caused by the fatigue are essential elements in determining multidimensional nursing interventions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".