Reimagining care for adolescent and young adult cancer programs: Moving with the times
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Literature regarding the development of adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer programs has been dominantly informed by pediatric centers and practitioners. However, the majority of young adults are seen and treated at adult cancer centers, in which cancer volumes afford the development of innovative supportive care services. Although the supportive care services in adult cancer centers are helpful to AYAs, some of the most prominent and distinct issues faced by AYAs are not adequately addressed through these services alone. This article describes how the AYA Program at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre has collaborated with existing supportive care services in addition to supplying its own unique services to meet the comprehensive needs of AYAs in the domains of: symptom management (sexuality and fatigue), behavior modification (return to work and exercise), and health services (advanced cancer and survivorship). These collaborations are augmented by patient education interventions and timely referrals. The objective of this article was to assist other centers in expanding existing services to address the needs of AYA patients with cancer.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 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".