Supporting Adolescents and Young Adults With Cancer Through Transitions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This position statement from the Canadian Task Force on Adolescents and Young Adults with cancer aims to (1) conceptualize the numerous transition experiences encountered by adolescents and young adults (AYA) with cancer; and (2) provide recommendations on how to help the AYA regain a sense of control over their lives as they adjust to these transition experiences. METHODS: We reviewed and synthesized a heterogeneous sample of studies and recommendations, ranging from well-designed case-controlled investigations to opinions of respected authorities based on clinical experience, and reports of expert committees. RESULTS: We describe the key factors that have an impact on different transitions during the cancer journey, and the need for developmentally appropriate services for AYA with cancer that consider both the system issues and individual transition issues. Our recommendations are not intended to be prescriptive, but they are broad enough to be applicable in different types of settings (eg, family doctor, cancer center, specialty service) and systems beyond health care (eg, school system, social system). CONCLUSIONS: The Task Force urges health care providers, parents, and AYA with cancer to work together in planning and implementing strategies that will enable individuals to navigate the transitions they encounter along the cancer journey successfully, and strive for meaningful participation in life situations, achieving their potential as fully functional members of society.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".