MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Androgen deprivation therapy educational program: A Canadian true nth initiative.

2016· article· en· W2589647670 on OpenAlexaffabout
Erik Wibowo, Lauren M. Walker, Shawn Wilyman, Andrew Matthew, Deborah McLeod, Richard J. Wassersug, John W. Robinson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences CentrePrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity Health NetworkProstate Cancer Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAndrogen deprivation therapyMedicineProstate cancerQuality of life (healthcare)Session (web analytics)Family medicinePhysical therapyGerontologyCancerInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

243 Background: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is commonly prescribed for advanced prostate cancer (PCa) patients, but ADT has many side effects that can impair patients’ quality of life. In various Canadian cities, we are running an educational program to help PCa patients and their partners deal with the side effects of ADT, and maintain a strong relationship with each other while on ADT. Methods: Patients, who are about to start or have been on ADT, and their partners are invited to attend an educational program. Each patient is given a copy of the book Androgen Deprivation Therapy: An essential guide for men with prostate cancer and their partners (Wassersug et al., 2014) and attends a 1.5 hour educational class, where they learn strategies for managing ADT side effects and how to effectively make healthier lifestyle changes using goal-setting exercises. At the end of the class, participants are given the option to attend a monthly follow-up session. To evaluate the effectiveness of the program, participants are asked to complete questionnaire package before attending the class and again 2-3 months later. Results: As of August 2015, 179 patients and 113 partners have attended the ADT Educational Program at Victoria, Vancouver, and Calgary. About 40% of patients returned for the follow-up session. 62 attendees participated in the research evaluation portion of the program. Uniquely designed for this study, the questionnaire package assesses ADT side effect frequency, bother associated with side effects, use of management strategies, and self-efficacy regarding side effect management. An assessment of physical activity and relationship adjustment, and feedback about the class are also included. Conclusions: Patients and partners appreciate being informed about ADT side effects managements and how to make healthier lifestyle changes while on ADT. It remains to be seen how effective the program is in limiting the bother from ADT side effects and helping couples maintain a strong dyadic relationship in the fact of the challenges brought on by ADT. Good enrollment in the in-person program in the 3 cities has propelled the development of the program in Halifax and Toronto starting in fall 2015, and an online version to be available in early 2016.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score0.182

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.186
GPT teacher head0.490
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicCancer survivorship and care→French-language works237,207→