MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W27186403 · doi:10.6004/jadpro.2013.4.4.3

Complementary Strategies for the Management of Radiation Therapy Side Effects

2013· review· en· W27186403 on OpenAlexaff
C Stubbe, M. Valero

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Advanced Practitioner in Oncology · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicComplementary and Alternative Medicine Studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian College of Naturopathic Medicine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMucositisSide effect (computer science)LimitingRadiation therapyDiarrheaCancerIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Patients with cancer utilize complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) for a variety of purposes, one of which is the reduction of side effects of conventional treatment. With a large number of their patients using CAM, it is important for advanced practitioners in oncology to have an understanding of these therapies to better guide their patients. Side effects of radiation therapy that may have dose-limiting poten-tial include diarrhea, mucositis, skin toxicity, and xerostomia. A com-mon side effect that is not necessarily dose-limiting but considerably troublesome to patients is cancer- and treatment-related fatigue. The CAM therapies that may alleviate some of the side effects of radiation therapy include probiotics, psyllium, exercise, melatonin, honey, acu-puncture, and calendula. Therapies that require more research or have been shown to be ineffective include aloe vera, glutamine, and deglyc-yrrhizinated licorice. This article provides an overview of these thera-pies as well as related research and analysis.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.364 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations29
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Advanced Practitioner in OncologySame topicComplementary and Alternative Medicine StudiesFrench-language works237,207