The Meaning and Experience of Patients Undergoing Rectal High-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: High-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy is a precise form of radiation therapy that targets cancerous tumors by directly applying the radiation source at the site or directly next to the tumor. Patients often experience but underreport pain and anxiety related to cancer treatments. At present, there is no research available concerning the pervasiveness and intensity of patients' pain and anxiety during rectal brachytherapy. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine patients' thoughts, emotions, coping strategies, physical sensations, and needs during rectal HDR brachytherapy treatment. METHODS: Twenty-five patients with rectal cancer were interviewed using a semi-structured qualitative interview following the completion of their brachytherapy treatment delivered at a Montreal-based hospital in Quebec, Canada. RESULTS: The experiences of pain and discomfort varied greatly between patients and were linked to the meaning patients attributed to the treatment itself, sense of time, the body's lithotomic position, insertion of the treatment applicator, and the patients' sense of agency and empowerment during the procedure. Patients drew upon a variety of internal and external resources to help them cope with discomfort. CONCLUSION: Staff need to know about the variation in the physical and emotional experiences of patients undergoing this treatment. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Clinical teams can tailor their procedural behavior (eg, using certain language, psychosocial interventions) according to patients' needs to increase patients' comfort and ultimately improve their experience of HDR rectal brachytherapy.
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) | 0.000 | 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".