"PSA-itis": knowledge of serum prostate specific antigen and other causes of anxiety in men with metaststic prostate cancer.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: High or increasing prostatic specific antigen (PSA) levels may be a source of anxiety in patients with metastatic prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with metastatic prostate cancer completed questionnaires, including the Prostate Cancer Specific Quality of Life Instrument, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and a questionnaire to assess the impact of the knowledge of PSA levels on anxiety. These were completed at home more than 3 days before or after a clinic appointment and returned by mail. Patient medical history was obtained from the record. RESULTS: Of the 65 patients who consented to the study 52 returned the completed questionnaires. Median age was 70 years (range 55 to 86) and median time since diagnosis was 53 months. Of the patients 81% had hormone resistant disease. Most reported good overall quality of life with a median Prostate Cancer Specific Quality of Life Instrument score of 93 (maximum 100). Of the patients 77% indicated that PSA levels were one of the ways and 44% indicated they were the only way that they knew whether disease was progressing. When asked to rate preferences for treatment outcome, 25% of the men rated decreasing PSA and worse physical symptoms above increasing PSA and better physical symptoms. If measurement of PSA levels ceased, 52% of patients would believe that their doctor was giving up on them and only 1 would be relieved. Before receiving PSA results 76% reported some level of anxiety and 15% reported extreme anxiety. CONCLUSIONS: PSA related anxiety represents a substantial problem in patients with metastatic prostate cancer.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".