The use of haematopoietic stem cell transplantation in Fanconi anaemia patients: a survey of decision making among families in the US and Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Fanconi anaemia (FA) is a rare genetic disorder associated with bone marrow failure (BMF), congenital anomalies and cancer susceptibility. Stem cell transplantation (SCT) offers a potential cure for BMF or leukaemia, but incurs substantial risks. Little is known about factors influencing SCT decision making. OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to explore factors influencing patients' with FA and family members' decision making about SCT. DESIGN: Using a mixed-methods exploratory design, we surveyed US and Canadian patients with FA and family members who were offered SCT. MAIN VARIABLES STUDIED: Closed-ended survey items measured respondents' beliefs about the necessity, risks and concerns regarding SCT; multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the association between these factors and the decision to undergo SCT. Open-ended survey items measured respondents' perceptions of factors important to the SCT decision; qualitative analysis was used to identify emergent themes. RESULTS: The decision to undergo SCT was significantly associated with greater perceived necessity (OR = 2.81, P = 0.004) and lower concern about harms of SCT (OR = 0.31, P = 0.03). Qualitative analysis revealed a perceived lack of choice among respondents regarding the use of SCT, which was related to physician influence and respondent concerns about patients' quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, study results emphasize the importance of the delicate interplay between provider recommendation of a medical procedure and patient/parental perceptions and decision making. Findings can help providers understand the need to acknowledge family members' perceptions of SCT decision making and offer a comprehensive discussion of the necessity, risks, benefits and potential 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".