MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2409982546 · doi:10.1017/s1478951515001005

Recovering function and surviving treatments are primary motivators for health behavior change in patients with head and neck cancer: Qualitative focus group study

2015· article· en· W2409982546 on OpenAlexaff
Mélissa Henry, Ala Bdira, Maria Cherba, Sylvie Lambert, Franco A. Carnevale, Christina MacDonald, Michael Hier, Anthony Zeitouni, Karen Kost, Alex Mlynarek, Martin J. Black, Zeev Rosberger, Saul Frenkiel

Bibliographic record

VenuePalliative & Supportive Care · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreUniversité de MontréalMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFocus groupMedicineThematic analysisCancerHead and neck cancerAnxietyFamily medicineQualitative researchHealth careClinical psychologyPhysical therapyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Against medical advice, head and neck cancer (HNC) patients have been shown to continue to smoke and misuse alcohol post-diagnosis and treatment. This study aimed to better understand the barriers to and facilitators of health behavior change (HBC) in HNC patients. METHOD: We conducted nine focus groups following a standard protocol. Eligible patients were diagnosed less than three years previously with a primary HNC and selected using maximum variability sampling (gender, age, cancer stage, smoking, and alcohol misuse). Thematic analysis was conducted using NVivo 10 software. RESULTS: Participants were mostly men (79%), 65 years of age (SD = 10.1), and married/common-law (52%, n = 15). Mean time from diagnosis was 19 months (SD = 12.3, range = 5.0-44.5), and most had advanced cancer (65.5%, n = 19). Participants provided a larger than anticipated definition of health behaviors, encompassing both traditional (smoking, drinking, diet, exercise, UV protection) and HNC-related (e.g., dental hygiene, skin care, speech exercises, using a PEG, gaining weight). The main emerging theme was patient engagement, that is, being proactive in rehabilitation, informed by the medical team, optimistic, flexible, and seeking support when needed. Patients were primarily motivated to stay proactive and engage in positive health behaviors in order to return to normal life and reclaim function, rather than to prevent a cancer recurrence. Barriers to patient engagement included emotional aspects (e.g., anxiety, depression, trauma, demoralization), symptoms (e.g., fatigue, pain), lack of information about HBC, and healthcare providers' authoritarian approach in counseling on HBC. We found some commonalities in barriers and facilitators according to behavior type (i.e., smoking/drinking/UV protection vs. diet/exercise). SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: This study underlines the key challenges in addressing health behaviors in head and neck oncology, including treatment-related functional impairments, symptom burden, and the disease's emotional toll. This delicate context requires health promotion strategies involving close rehabilitative support from a multidisciplinary team attentive to the many struggles of patients both during treatments and in the longer-term recovery period. Health promotion in HNC should be integrated into routine clinical care and target both traditional and HNC-related behaviors, emphasizing emotional and functional rehabilitation as key components.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.303 · 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.

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

Citations25
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalliative & Supportive CareSame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207