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 OpenAlexafffundabout
Donna E. Stewart, Angela M. Cheung, Susan Duff, F. Wong, Maurene McQuestion, Teresa Cheng, Laura Purdy, Terry Bunston

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.102

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations108
Published2001
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsycho-OncologySame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207