Gamma Knife patients’ experience: lessons learned from a qualitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Gamma Knife stereotactic radiosurgery (GKSRS) is an outpatient radiation therapy procedure in which a highly focused dose of radiation is delivered in a single fraction. It is used to treat a variety of well-demarcated intracranial lesions, including brain tumors. This study aims to explore patients' perspectives of the GKSRS process and the various stages involved. METHODS: Qualitative research methodology was used. Three semi-structured, open-ended interviews were conducted with 29 participants, who were ambulatory adult patients who underwent GKSRS between August 2007 and August 2008. RESULTS: Seven overarching themes emerged from the data: (1) patients were satisfied with the overall treatment experience; (2) the majority of patients had a good knowledge of GKSRS; (3) the quality and amount of patient education were adequate; (4) process expectations were largely met; (5) most patients prioritized outcome over process; (6) most patients had a realistic expectation of outcomes; and (7) pain and anxiety were important issues. CONCLUSIONS: The study results reflected positively on the GKSRS process, but there were some areas identified that require improvement, specifically the referral-consultation process and the management of procedural pain. These insights on the patients' perspectives can lead to better delivery of care and ultimately, improved health outcomes.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".