Creation of On-PROST: The Ontario patient-reported outcomes of symptoms and toxicity applied clinical research unit.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
47 Background: The 14 Ontario Regional Cancer Centers serve a catchment of 13 million people, centrally coordinated by Cancer Care Ontario. Since 2009, computer kiosks collect the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) patient reported outcomes (PROs). At specific centers, additional PROs such as the Distress Assessment and Response Tool (DART) have been integrated. On-PROST was created in 2011 to customize PROs for disease-, treatment- and phase-specific symptoms and toxicities, and to address core multidimensional impacts of cancer. On-PROST aims to improve patient experience and quality of care through routine collection of standardized sets of PROs for combined use in clinical care and research. Methods: On-PROST structure has five research pillars, each dependent on quality PROs: Health Services Research; Biomarker Research; Radiation Oncology; Palliative/Supportive Care; and the PROs-Cancer Core items. National/international partnerships are being established to develop, standardize and implement PROs relevant across the entire cancer continuum. Results: National consensus was generated for the implementation of the Canadian PROMs-Cancer Core. Key domains on physical, emotional and social health were included, and implementation testing has begun. In parallel, specific On-PROST sub-projects have focused on identifying, validating, and standardizing logic-based sets of PROs for disease-, treatment- and phase-specific symptoms and toxicities. On-PROST projects have focused on topics that complement existing research by other groups (PROMIS, PRO-CTCAE). Initial projects have included: (i) assessment of dysphagia and related symptoms in head and neck and esophageal cancer populations; (ii) short/long term sexual function in prostate and testicular cancers; (iii) a lung cancer radiogenetic toxicity study; and (iv) patient reported outcomes related to physical activity and other modifiable behaviors after cancer diagnosis. Conclusions: The multi-pronged structure of On-PROST will systematically collect disease-, treatment-, and phase-specific PROs at a population level.
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 | 0.021 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.003 |
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".