Current state and future prospects of research on fear of cancer recurrence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite a rapidly growing research interest in fear of cancer recurrence, lack of consensus on definition and measurement including clinical fear of cancer recurrence, sparse model development and testing, and limited available clinical interventions have impeded knowledge transfer into patient services. To move forward, a 2-day colloquium was held in Ottawa, Canada in August 2015 to progress knowledge and identify future research directions. A comprehensive research program was proposed, including development of a clinical definition, an updated review of screening measures, and a review of existing interventions. A new special interest group was created with the International Psychosocial Oncology Society to facilitate the implementation of this research program and future international collaborations. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.093 | 0.078 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.022 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.002 |
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".