MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2586386991 · doi:10.2196/cancer.5821

Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer Survivorship Educational Programming: A Qualitative Evaluation

2017· article· en· W2586386991 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Deborah Vollmer Dahlke, Kayla Fair, Yan Hong, Debra Kellstedt, Marcia G. Ory

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Cancer · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas
KeywordsSurvivorship curveCancer survivorshipQualitative researchGerontologyPsychologyCancerOncologyMedicineSociologyInternal medicineSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: This program evaluation considers the need for increased professional and patient education for adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer survivorship. Due to the high incidence of late effects of cancer treatment among AYA cancer survivors, knowledge sharing and communications are needed throughout the transition from cancer care into community care. AYA survivors are likely to need developmentally appropriate psychosocial care as well as extensive follow-on surveillance by physicians who are educated and aware of the likely chronic conditions and late effects that may occur in these patients. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of the After Cancer Care Ends, Survivorship Starts for Adolescent and Young Adults (ACCESS AYA) programming. The intent of the ACCESS AYA program was to build health literacy around AYA survivorship issues and to stimulate improved communications between survivors and health care providers. This paper addresses the central research question of "How did the ACCESS AYA program increase health literacy, communications, and understanding among AYA survivors and providers?" METHODS: The primarily qualitative evaluation included a brief introductory survey of participant awareness and effectiveness of the ACCESS AYA project serving as a recruitment tool. Survey respondents were invited to participate in in-depth interviews based on interview guides tailored to the different stakeholder groups. The evaluation used the Atlas Ti qualitative database and software for coding and key word analyses. Interrater reliability analyses were assessed using Cohen kappa analysis with Stata 12.1 (StataCorp LLC) software. RESULTS: The key themes, which included survivor wellbeing, health care professional education, cancer advocates role and education, hospital and community-based resources, and the role of societal support, are presented in a concept map. The interrater reliability scores (ranging from 1 to minus 1) were .893 for first cycle coding and .784 for the second cycle. In the brief quantitative survey based on a scale of 1 to 5 with 5 as high, the 22 respondents rated their level of awareness of the project with a mean 3.2 (CI 3.02-3.45) and project effectiveness with a mean of 4 (CI 3.72-4.27). CONCLUSIONS: This study contributes to understanding of the ACCESS AYA survivor community in central Texas and the health care professionals and advocates who aid them in their efforts to a new normal life and wellbeing in their survivorship. The results of the evaluation highlight the need to continue to build both survivor and professional resources to address the unique impact of cancer on AYA cancer survivors.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.157
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.482
Teacher spread0.373 · 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

Citations19
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR CancerSame topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207