Exploring Cancer Worry in Adolescent and Young Adult Survivors of Childhood Cancers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Adolescent and young adult (AYA) survivors of cancers in childhood experience cancer worry, defined as concerns about cancer-related issues such as relapse and late effects of treatment. Cancer worry is an important determinant of successful transition to long-term follow-up care. The primary aim of this study was to identify patient-, cancer-, and treatment-related factors associated with cancer worry in AYA survivors. A secondary aim was to explore and understand inappropriate cancer worry (e.g., worry of developing a late effect when not at risk) in this population. METHODS: Two hundred and fifty AYA survivors, aged 15–26 years, completed a 6-item Cancer Worry Scale. Selection of factors potentially associated with cancer worry was guided by literature and expert opinion for inclusion in univariable and multivariable regression analyses. RESULTS: Female survivors reported significantly more cancer worry than males did (b=-9.4; 95% CI -14.4 to -4.5; p < 0.001). Survivors treated with the most intensive therapies reported more cancer worry compared with those who received the least intensive therapies (b=-18.5; 95% CI -31.2 to -5.9; p = 0.004). Thirty-one percent of participants had inappropriate worry regarding infertility and/or secondary malignancy. CONCLUSIONS: In AYA survivors, female sex and higher treatment intensity were associated with increased cancer worry. Inappropriate worry was prevalent among survivors and may contribute to unnecessary distress. These findings can help identify survivors who are more likely to worry and support the development of appropriate services to reduce the effect of cancer worry on survivor well-being.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".