Screening for psychological distress in very long-term adult survivors of childhood cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study evaluated the prevalence of psychological distress (PD) in a cohort of 348 adult childhood cancer survivors with a very long-term follow-up and assessed the characteristics associated with this distress (cancer type, treatment, sex, age at diagnosis, self-reported late effects, social support, type of remembrance, time since the diagnosis, age at evaluation), assuming that with time since the diagnosis, the PD of survivors will approximate that of the general population. Before attending a long-term follow-up consultation, survivors were sent 3 questionnaires: the Brief Symptom Inventory-18, the Impact of Event Scale, and the Illness Worry Scale (IWS). During the visit, they were administered the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) by a psychologist. The mean age of the survivors was 38.5 years (18.1-65.8) at consultation, 7 years (0.0-18.0) at cancer diagnosis, and mean time since diagnosis was 31.5 years (8.8-56.1). Multiple regression analyses of the data collected from self-administered questionnaires confirmed that being female, living alone, and self-reported late effects were associated with the high scores for all scales. Negative remembrances and being accompanied to the clinic were associated with higher IWS scores. Unlike the initial hypothesis, the MINI showed that, compared with controls, survivors experienced a higher prevalence of anxiety and mood disorders even after a very long time since the diagnosis. These findings show that a substantial subset of survivors experiment a high prevalence of PD, higher than the general population, and should be screened for PD whatever the time since the diagnosis.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".