MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Diagnostic and treatment challenges of adolescent and young adult oncology patients.

2012· article· en· W2461756240 on OpenAlexaff
Yanqing Xu, Mauro José Lahm Cardoso, Michael Palumbo, O. Ishibashi, Petr Kavan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInterquartile rangeMalignancyYoung adultHealth carePediatricsCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

9557 Background: Adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer patients are faced with obstacles and challenges related to their diagnosis and treatment compared to children and older adults. The aim of this study was to explore the patient and health care system-related delays in the interval from cancer symptom onset to diagnosis and treatment as well as to identify the possible contributing factors to these delays in the AYA group. Methods: This study was based on a questionnaire conducted in 2010-2011 completed by patients diagnosed with a malignancy between the ages of 16 and 39 in addition to older patients diagnosed with a pediatric type malignancy. Four categories of delays: patient delay (time from patient symptom onset until first health care contact date), health care system delay (time from first health care contact until diagnosis date), treatment delay (time from diagnosis date until first treatment) and oncologist delay (time from first health care contact until first medical oncologist meeting) were calculated. Median delay (in days) with interquartile interval (IQI) was the main outcome measure. Median time for each category of delay was further analysed to explore how they vary with different patient characteristics. Results: We identified a median patient delay of 30 days (IQI 1-131), a median health care system delay of 53 days (IQI 1-213), a median treatment delay of 36 days (IQI 5-92) and a median oncologist delay of 77 days (IQI 30-281). Patient delay was affected by patient gender, age at diagnosis and type of first health care contact. Health care system delay was associated with patient marital status, financial situation and attitude of first health care professional. Treatment delay was related to type of cancer. Conclusions: The health care system delay (including oncologist delay) accounts for much of the delay from symptom onset to first treatment. Professional characteristics of frontline medical personnel as well as socioeconomic and biological characteristics of the patients may contribute to delay. Healthcare professionals and the general community as a whole need to be aware of the factors contributing to delay in diagnosis and treatment in the underserved patient population.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.150
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life→French-language works237,207→