Nonmelanoma Skin Cancer: Disease-Specific Quality-of-Life Concerns and Distress
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: To provide a better understanding of the disease-specific quality-of-life (QOL) concerns of patients with nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC). DESIGN: Cross-sectional. SETTING: Skin cancer clinic of Jewish General Hospital in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. SAMPLE: 56 patients with basal cell carcinoma and/or squamous cell carcinoma. METHODS: Descriptive and inferential statistics applied to quantitative self-report data. MAIN RESEARCH VARIABLES: Importance of appearance, psychological distress, and QOL. FINDINGS: The most prevalent concerns included worries about tumor recurrence, as well as the potential size and conspicuousness of the scar. Skin cancer-specific QOL concerns significantly predicted distress manifested through anxious and depressive symptomology. In addition, the social concerns related to the disease were the most significant predictor of distress. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study provide healthcare professionals with a broad picture of the most prevalent NMSC-specific concerns, as well as the concerns that are of particular importance for different subgroups of patients. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Nurses are in a position to provide pivotal psychosocial and informational support to patients, so they need to be aware of the often-overlooked psychosocial effects of NMSC to address these issues and provide optimal care.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it