The Experience of Pain and Anxiety in Rectal Cancer Patients During High-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pain and anxiety have been reported as primary concerns for patients with head-and-neck, gynecologic, and prostate cancers undergoing high dose rate (hdr) brachytherapy. However, almost no research has been published on the degree to which these symptoms are experienced by rectal cancer patients undergoing hdr brachytherapy. We conducted a pilot study examining the experiences of rectal cancer patients during hdr brachytherapy, specifically the intensity and trajectory of their anxiety and pain. METHODS: Rectal cancer patients (n = 25) who received hdr brachytherapy treatment at a hospital in Montreal, Quebec, completed verbal analog scales for pain and anxiety at 4 time points over 4 treatment days. RESULTS: On all 4 days, a subset of patients reported moderate-to-severe anxiety before applicator insertion. Pain increased significantly from the time patients were lying on the table to immediately after insertion of the applicator (p < 0.001). Insertion of the applicator appears to be the most painful part of the procedure, and although anxiety declined to below baseline after applicator removal, pain remained somewhat elevated. Some patients required conscious sedation; however, reports of moderate-to-severe pain were more frequent from patients who received pain medications than from patients who did not receive such medication (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with rectal cancer tolerated hdr rectal brachytherapy well, although the procedure is stressful and painful for some. Insertion of the applicator was found to be the point of maximal pain, and medication was not always completely successful at alleviating the pain, suggesting that additional psychosocial interventions might be needed, with particular emphasis on the time of applicator insertion.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".