MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2384867004

Prevalence survey on pain, anxiety and depression of breast cancer patients with radical mastectomy

2011· article· en· W2384867004 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Xiaomei Li

Bibliographic record

VenueChinese Nursing Management · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnxietyDepression (economics)MedicineBreast cancerMcGill Pain QuestionnairePhysical therapyRating scaleVisual analogue scaleHospital Anxiety and Depression ScaleCancerInternal medicinePsychiatryPsychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: To investigate the present situation of pain, anxiety and depression by surveying 120 female patients aged 25~65 with breast cancer hospitalized for radical mastectomy. Methods: Three instruments were used to assess the subjects' anxiety and depression on the day before the operation and pain on the first day after the operation through the way of prevalence survey, which included State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), Self-rating Depression Scale (SDS) and Short-Form of Mcgill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ). Results:Of pain indices, subjects' PRI (Pain Rating Index), VAS (Visual Analogue Scale) and PPI (Present Pain Intensity) scores were 8.12±2.83, 4.49±1.08, and 2.65±0.55 respectively; State anxiety score was 51.99±8.60, moderate to severe anxiety account for 77.5% and 15.0%. Trait anxiety score was 48.30±6.18, moderate to severe anxiety account for 90.0% and 3.3%. Depression score was 37.19±6.30, moderate to severe depression account for 25.0% and 2.8%. Conclusions: Breast cancer patients have different kinds of psychological reaction, anxiety and depression in different levels before the operation as well as different levels of pain and sensitivity to pain after the operation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.105
Threshold uncertainty score0.391

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.240 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChinese Nursing ManagementSame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207