Prospective study of specialist oncology community nursing resulting in improvements in key patient supportive care outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
9107 Background: Cancer patients report ongoing significant gaps in supportive care. To date few interventions have been shown to improve supportive care outcomes in cancer. Research in other areas suggests that specialist nursing interventions in the community may address gaps in unmet need, continuity of care and quality of life. This study prospectively studied a community based nursing intervention for cancer patients. Methods: Patients were followed using a longitudinal cohort design, with assessments at baseline (T1), four (T2) and eight (T3) weeks, upon enrollment in a specialist nursing program. The nursing intervention included a comprehensive supportive care assessment and subsequent care delivery or linkage to appropriate services in the community. Validated patient assessment outcomes included: Supportive Cancer Needs Survey Short Form 34, Quality of Life (EORTC QLC-30(v3)), Continuity and Coordination of Care (CCCQ), and a service utilization instrument. Results: 72 of 109 enrolled patients completed all study measures. The majority had advanced stage disease. Median age was 59 years. Disease categories for participants included: breast (33%), gastrointestinal. (18.1%), lung (13.9%), ovarian (9.7%), and head and neck (8.3%). All participants received a baseline comprehensive assessment and had a mean of 1.7 home visits with a mean of 3.9 telephone contacts. We observed significant reductions in most supportive care need domains ( Table ). There were trends to improvement in domains of quality of life and continuity of care. We also observed reductions in acute care services use and increased community agency use. Conclusions: This is one of the first prospective studies in cancer patients that demonstrates improvements in a number of supportive care outcomes through a community based specialist nursing intervention. A randomized study to confirm these findings is currently underway. [Table: see text] No significant financial relationships to disclose.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".