Bibliographic record
Abstract
Oncology patients experience the occurrence of multiple symptoms impacting their qualityof life. In Brazil, little is done to improve oncology patients quality of life, since we do nothave valid and reliable instruments to evaluate multiple symptoms and we do not approachmens health considering the relational nature of gender. The Symptom Experience Index(SEI), developed and validated in the United States, is a 41-item Likert scale whichmeasures symptom experience by providing symptom experience scores, symptomoccurrence scores and symptom distress scores. The instrument was translated intoPortuguese (SEI-P) and validated in this study in a sample of 40 healthy people and wasused in 138 oncology male patients to assess symptom experience and investigate itsrelation with quality of life. The SEI-P showed good internal consistency (Cronbachalpha=0.96, Intraclass correlation=0.93). Sample was composed by 73 men with prostatecancer, 45 with colon rectal cancer, and 20 men with lung cancer. Age varied from 32 to88 years old, the majority lived in Belo Horizonte, was married, presented low educationallevel, low income and was retired. ECOG performance status varied from 0 to 1 in 129men (93.7%), 76 (56%) were ex-smokers and 58 (42%) were avoiding any alcohol intake.Seventy percent (n=96) presented comorbidities and 53% (n=72) had metastasis. Men withcolon rectal cancer scored higher for occurrence of fatigue (M=2.08, 2.41) and gastricproblems (M=2.04, SD=2.54); men with prostate cancer scored higher for occurrence offatigue (M=2.38, SD=2.69) and urinate problems (M=1.87, SD=2.05); and men with lungcancer scored higher for neurologic symptoms (M=3.42, SD=3.10), pain and discomfort(M=3, SD=1.52), respiratory problems (M=2.14, SD=1.77) and appearance dissatisfaction(M=1.14, SD=1.06). Distress severity was worse for the symptoms which occurred moreoften. Total mean scores for symptom occurrence and distress were higher in lung cancerpatients. Pain was assessed using the Short McGill questionnaire. Sensitive pain was worsein prostate cancer patients (M=9.52, SD=6.88) and lung cancer patients (M=9.41, SD=5.14),while affective pain scores were higher in patients with prostate cancer (M=6, SD=3.82).Quality of life was moderately low, as evaluated by the WHOQOL-bref. Physical domainhad the worst score in all groups, especially for men with lung cancer (M=13.89, SD=2.89).Quality of life was significantly correlated to symptom experience for colon rectal cancerpatients (r= -0.40/p=0.01) and lung cancer patients (r= -0.58/p=0.009). Gender and healthissues showed an important influence in this study, suggesting that healthcare professionalsneed to consider male subjective when assessing symptom distress in order to adequatelyintervene promoting male oncology patients quality of life.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".