Patterns of symptom control and palliative care-focused original research articles in major radiation oncology journals.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
216 Background: National oncology and palliative care organizations recommend greater incorporation of palliative care in clinical care and research in advanced cancer to improve care quality. In radiation oncology, palliative oncology care represents approximately 30-40% of treatment courses. Given the frequency of palliative care in radiation oncology and recommendations for greater research at this intersection, we sought to determine the prevalence and patterns of publication of symptom control and palliative care focused original research articles in two prominent radiation oncology journals from 2004-2015. Methods: From 2005 to 2014, abstracts of original research manuscripts published in the International Journal of Radiation Oncology (Red Journal) and the Radiotherapy and Oncology (Green Journal) journals were reviewed to determine the number and content of abstracts relating to symptom control and palliative care (SCPC). Research articles were included if their abstract described a patient population with advanced or metastatic cancer and were considered focused on SCPC if symptom palliation was the goal of treatment or patterns of palliative care needs was the goal of the research inquiry. Change in annual proportion of SCPC abstracts over time was assessed with the χ-square trend test. Results: From 2005 -2014, 10.6% (593/5611: range 4.2-17%) of all original research articles published in the Red Journal and 14.5% (365/2516: range 12.2-17.4%) published in the Green Journal involved palliative care. In the Red Journal, 1.3% (75/5611) of original research articles were specifically focused on SCPC and 5.3% (133/2516) in the Green Journal. In both journals the number of abstracts did not change over time (p = 0.24). Randomized controlled trials accounted for a minority (10.6%, 22/208) of SCPC abstracts in both journals. Conclusions: SCPC-focused original research is poorly represented in two major radiation oncology academic journals. Palliative radiotherapy is a critical part of radiotherapy clinical practice and should be the subject of further research; particularly needed is research employing rigorous study designs.
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 | 0.043 | 0.205 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.076 | 0.067 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".