National survey addressing the information needs of primary care physicians: Side effect management of patients on androgen deprivation therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is a common treatment for prostate cancer with numerous side effects. We assess primary care physicians' (PCPs) knowledge of ADT side effects and their interest in increasing their knowledge in this area. METHODS: A list of active Canadian PCPs was obtained using the Canadian Medical Directory. A cross-sectional survey was distributed to 600 randomly selected physicians. We collected PCPs' demographic information, experience with ADT management, knowledge regarding ADT side effects and desired sources for obtaining knowledge on ADT management. RESULTS: In total, we received 103 completed questionnaires. Of these, 89% of PCPs had patients on ADT. One-third of respondents prescribed ADT and over half of them administered ADT annually. Thirty-eight percent felt their knowledge of ADT side effects was inadequate and 50% felt uncomfortable counselling patients on ADT. Many PCPs were less familiar with the incidence of functional side effects of ADT (i.e., hot flashes, fatigue and erectile dysfunction) compared to life-threatening side effects (i.e., cardiovascular events, metabolic syndrome, fractures). In terms of increasing their knowledge of ADT side effects, 82% of PCPs would use educational resources if they were available (52% and 32% preferred continued medical education [CME] events and educational pamphlets, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: PCPs play an important role in managing ADT side effects. There is poor awareness of the prevalence of ADT side effects, and many are uncomfortable in managing these side effects. These areas may be addressed through CME programs and educational pamphlets.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".