Unmet supportive care needs and desire for assistance in patients receiving radiation treatment: Implications for oncology nursing
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Unmet supportive care needs can contribute to emotional distress and reduced quality of life for cancer patients. We undertook a supportive care needs assessment for patients undergoing radiation therapy to provide a basis for program planning. A self-report supportive care needs survey was completed by a convenience sample of 115 patients on days five, seven and 16 during their course of radiation. The most frequently identified physical unmet needs at all three times were fatigue (33%-49%), dry and itchy skin (24%-37%), and sleep difficulties (23%-30%). The number of patients citing these unmet needs increased significantly over the study time period. Within the emotional domain, worry (34.5%) was cited most frequently on day five. The number of individuals expressing worry did not decrease significantly by day 16. Across all domains and individual items, there was wide variation in the percentage of individuals who had an unmet need and also indicated they wanted help with that unmet need. This pattern remained consistent over time. This study emphasizes the need for a defined or intentional process to assess supportive care needs and patient desire for assistance or help with unmet needs.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 it