Supportive care needs of patients with advanced disease undergoing radiotherapy for symptom control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many patients with advanced cancer have numerous medical complications and multiple sites involving metastases that cause distressing symptoms. Radiotherapy is often used for the palliative treatment of these patients, especially those with bone metastases. There is a lack of information about the types of supportive care needs these patients experience, the services that are available for them, and whether people want help with their needs. The main purpose of this cross-sectional, descriptive study was to identify the supportive care needs (physical, emotional, social, spiritual, psychological, and practical) of patients with advanced cancer who attended the Palliative Radiation Therapy Rapid Response Clinic (PRTRRC) at a comprehensive, ambulatory cancer centre. A second purpose was to determine if patients wanted assistance in meeting those needs. A total of 69 patients participated in this study by completing a self-report questionnaire. The data provided a clear indication that a range of supportive care needs remained unmet for this patient group. Lack of energy, pain, and concerns about the worries of those close to them were the most frequently reported needs. Additionally, patients expressed a range of difficulty managing needs and many of these patients desired help to manage the identified needs. However, despite this reality, significant numbers of patients indicated they did not wish to have assistance with some needs. Suggestions for practice and future research are offered to assist oncology nurses in providing supportive care to these patients.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".