MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073488495 · doi:10.5737/1181912x154215220

Predictors of symptom distress in women with breast cancer during the first chemotherapy cycle

2005· article· en· W2073488495 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marcia Boehmke, Jean K. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Oncology Nursing Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDistressOptimismBreast cancerMedicineClinical psychologyChemotherapyPsychological distressInternal medicineCancerPsychologyPsychiatryAnxietyPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To determine the extent to which personal characteristics and "person factors" predict symptom distress during the first cycle of chemotherapy. DESIGN: Prospective, longitudinal, correlational. SAMPLE AND SETTING: 120 women with Stage I and II breast cancer starting their first cycle of chemotherapy were recruited from six diverse oncology settings. METHODS: Self-report questionnaires were completed prior to the beginning, the nadir, and the end of the first chemotherapy cycles. MAIN RESEARCH VARIABLES: Personal characteristics, "person factors", and symptom distress. FINDINGS: Optimism and external locus of control predicted low symptom distress levels at the both the nadir and at the end of the first cycle. Fatigue, appearance, and insomnia caused the greatest distress with higher symptom distress scores reported at the nadir with a mean item score of 1.98 on a five-point Likert scale. CONCLUSIONS: Women who maintained a positive outlook, and trusted their health care providers experienced lower levels of symptom distress. Findings suggest that most women experienced some symptom distress, particularly during the middle of the first cycle of chemotherapy.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.450
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations13
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Oncology Nursing JournalSame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207