A longitudinal study of changing characteristics of self-reported taste and smell alterations in patients treated for lung cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Taste and smell alterations (TSAs) are common symptoms in patients with cancer that may interfere with nutritional intake and quality of life. In this study, we explore and describe how characteristics of self-reported TSAs change in individuals with lung cancer over time using a multiple case study approach to present longitudinal data from individuals. METHODS: Patients under investigation for lung cancer were recruited from one university hospital in Sweden. The 52 patients providing data eligible for the analyses presented here were those treated for primary lung cancer with three measurement time-points, of which one was prior to treatment and two after treatment start. Four self-report instruments were used for data collection. These included the Taste and Smell Survey, used to characterize TSAs for each individual at the three time-points and instruments measuring nutritional status, symptom burden and well-being. Three patient cases are described in detail to illustrate variation in individual experiences of TSAs. RESULTS: The characteristics of the TSAs experienced changed over time for many of the individuals in this study, including those undergoing surgery or stereotactic radiotherapy. The case descriptions show how the individual experiences of TSAs and the impact on daily life of these symptoms not only depend on TSA characteristics, but may be influenced by contextual factors, e.g. other symptoms and life situation. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that healthcare professionals need to consider the variation in characteristics of TSAs among and within patients over time, and be attentive to individual experiences of TSAs.
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) | 0.000 | 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".