Patients’ experience of receiving radiation treatment for head and neck cancer: Before, during and after treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most research to date in the area of head and neck cancer has focused on the efficacy of treatment modalities and the assessment and management of treatment side effects and toxicities. Little or no attention has been directed toward understanding patients' experience of receiving radiation treatment for the management of their cancer. The purpose of this qualitative study was to explore the experience of individuals receiving radiation treatment for a cancer of the head and neck. Face-to-face interviews were conducted with 17 individuals. Thorne's (1997) approach of interpretive description along with Giorgi's analytical technique for analysis were used. Experiences across interviews revealed five main themes: 1) making sense of the diagnosis, 2) distress from disrupted expectations, 3) heightened awareness of self, others and the health care system, 4) strategies to 'get through' treatment, and 5) living with uncertainty. Findings from the study have contributed to the development of head and neck cancer-specific patient support and education programs for patients and families.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".