Living with cancer and other chronic conditions: Patients’ perceptions of their healthcare experience
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multimorbidity is known to contribute to the complexity of care for patients with cancer. This qualitative study begins to explore cancer patients' experience with multimodal treatments, that is, treatments for multiple chronic conditions, as well as issues related to navigating the healthcare system. Participants (n=10) were recruited from an ambulatory cancer centre in a large, university-affiliated hospital in Montreal, Quebec. Important challenges were reported in terms of striking a fine balance between acute health needs and underlying ongoing chronic condition(s), experiencing unforeseen treatment complications, and negotiating silos across medical specialties. Participants also wished to be better known by the healthcare team. When reporting a positive care coordination experience, participants often attributed it to the intervention by a nurse navigator. Lastly, participants expected a more personalized care approach and would have liked to be included in multidisciplinary board meetings. Study results underscore the impetus to better integrate care across diseases, enhance person-centred care, and support patients who strive to balance competing needs when facing multimorbidity.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it