MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169463622 · doi:10.1177/1043454208315546

Chemotherapy-Related Fatigue in Childhood Cancer: Correlates, Consequences, and Coping Strategies

2008· article· en· W2169463622 on OpenAlexaff
Stan F. Whitsett, María Guðmundsdóttir, Betty Davies, Patricia McCarthy, Debra Friedman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pediatric Oncology Nursing · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoping (psychology)MoodCancer-related fatigueMedicineClinical psychologyChildhood cancerQualitative researchPediatric oncologyChemotherapyCancer chemotherapyPsychologyPsychiatryCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this research is to examine the experience and impact of chemotherapy-related fatigue in recently diagnosed pediatric oncology patients. A repeated-measures, within-subjects, mixed (quantitative plus qualitative) design was used to prospectively assess fatigue during early chemotherapy cycles and to compare fatigue to depressive symptoms. Parental interviews collected concurrently were analyzed for descriptions of the child's fatigue and mood states and for strategies to cope with fatigue. Results indicated a significant correlation between fatigue and depression, but qualitative analyses suggested that the 2 phenomena may be unique and distinguishable. Qualitative analyses of parent interviews also identified specific strategies that were frequently used in response to high levels of fatigue. The findings illustrate the significant impact of chemotherapy-related fatigue in children being treated for cancer. The study also provides guidance for the assessment of fatigue and related symptoms and identifies specific strategies for coping with fatigue.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.323 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations69
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pediatric Oncology NursingSame topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207