Patients' experiences following local–regional recurrence of thyroid cancer: A qualitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The psychosocial impact of local-regional thyroid cancer recurrence is not known. The aim of this study was to explore thyroid cancer patients' experiences relating to diagnosis and treatment of local-regional disease recurrence. METHODS: We conducted 15 semi-structured interviews with survivors of differentiated thyroid cancer who underwent neck reoperation for recurrent disease. Participants were recruited from the clinical practices of thyroid surgeons and endocrinologists at University Health Network and Mount Sinai Hospitals in Toronto, Ontario. Participant interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using qualitative methods. Saturation of themes was achieved. RESULTS: Local-regional recurrence of thyroid cancer was associated with significant psychological distress. Confidence in healthcare providers as well as psychosocial support from family or social relations, were helpful in coping with disease recurrence. After recovery from treatment, post-traumatic growth was reported. However, questions and worry about the risk for future recurrence lingered at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Local-regional recurrence of thyroid cancer has a significant psychosocial impact on patients, and support needs are heightened throughout the experience. Healthcare providers should strive to ensure that medical information and psychosocial needs of such patients are met, throughout the treatment experience, as well as at follow-up.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".