MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050125134 · doi:10.1002/pon.499

Long‐term breast cancer survivors: confidentiality, disclosure, effects on work and insurance

2001· article· en· W2050125134 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePsycho-Oncology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCegep de Sept IlesUniversity Health Network
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsConfidentialityBreast cancerMedicineFamily medicineDisability insuranceCancerLife insuranceSocial securityInternal medicineActuarial scienceBusinessPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

UNLABELLED: As more women are diagnosed with breast cancer, more will survive the illness from a few years to a lifetime. This study sought to determine the experience of Canadian breast cancer survivors with respect to the impact of cancer on confidentiality, work and insurance. METHOD: Women who had survived breast cancer without recurrence for at least 2 years completed a mail survey about the effect of their illness on confidentiality, disclosure, work and insurance. RESULTS: 378 (75.6%) women breast cancer survivors responded to the survey. Their mean age was 61.0+/-10.9 years, and 67.6% had been recurrence free for more than 5 years. The majority of women rated hospital staff, family doctors, family, friends, and support groups at the highest possible level of confidentiality. Over 70% of survivors disclosed their diagnosis to friends, children, siblings, and partners, while over 50% disclosed to work colleagues and supervisors. However, over 40% felt cancer had altered their priorities or progress at work, and 5% were afraid to change jobs in case they became ill again. There was a lack of knowledge about insurance but, of the types of insurance identified, life insurance (17.9%), extended health insurance (7.7%), and private disability insurance (4.4%) were reported to have been refused or offered only with higher premiums as a result of a past diagnosis of breast cancer. DISCUSSION: A substantial minority of women perceived that cancer had substantially affected their personal and work lives. Although most felt their illness confidentiality was well protected and they disclosed freely to family, friends, and work, over 40% of women survivors reported that cancer had affected their work in various ways, and nearly 20% identified insurance problems. It appears that disclosure sometimes results in negative work and insurance experiences. CONCLUSIONS: Health professionals and cancer survivors should engage in education about the potential positive and negative effects of disclosure, and advocacy against cancer-based work and insurance discrimination.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.158
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.320 · 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