MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Psychological Distress and Cancer Survival

2003· article· en· W2089437545 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychosomatic Medicine · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsCentre for Advancing Health OutcomesJewish General HospitalMcGill UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaParks Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClinical psychologyDiseaseCancerPsychological distressDistressEmotional distressPsychologyCognitionMedicinePsychiatryMental healthInternal medicineAnxiety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This study tested the predictive role of psychological distress in cancer survival, while attempting to overcome several important methodological and statistical limitations that have clouded the issue. METHODS: Measures collected on a range of emotional and cognitive factors in the early postdiagnostic period and at 4-month intervals up to 15 months after diagnosis were used to predict survival time up to 10 years among 205 cancer patients heterogeneous in disease site, status, and progression. RESULTS: With the use of both baseline and repeated measures, depressive symptomology was the most consistent psychological predictor of shortened survival time, after controlling for several known demographic and medical risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: Given the importance of depressive symptoms to cancer survival, discussion focuses on the possible mechanisms mediating this relationship, the importance of psychological screening of cancer patients, and need for further research.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.302
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

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)0.0040.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.317 · 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