Traumatic stress in patients with acute leukemia: <scp>A</scp> prospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Acute leukemia (AL) is associated with an immediate threat to life, an unpredictable clinical course, and substantial physical suffering. Traumatic stress symptoms that may meet criteria for acute stress disorder (ASD) may be common and disabling in this context, but have received little clinical attention. We investigated the incidence over time and risk factors for traumatic stress symptoms and ASD in the 3 months following diagnosis or relapse of AL. METHODS: Individuals with AL were recruited at a tertiary cancer center in Canada within one month of diagnosis or relapse. Participants (N = 230) completed self-report measures, including the Stanford Acute Stress Reaction Questionnaire, at baseline and monthly over 3 months. The incidence of traumatic stress symptoms over time was examined, and a generalized logistic model was used to identify factors associated with ASD. RESULTS: Participants were 60% male, with a mean age of 48.9 ± 15.2 years. Symptoms of ASD were identified on ≥1 assessment over the study period in 24.4% of participants at baseline and in an additional 12.6% at a subsequent follow-up. Of these, 55.3% reported symptoms on ≥2 assessments. ASD was associated with having young children, being unmarried, acute lymphocytic leukemia, and greater physical symptom burden. Persistent or recurrent ASD was associated with female sex, acute lymphocytic leukemia, greater attachment anxiety, less spiritual well-being, and less satisfactory patient-clinician communication. CONCLUSIONS: Symptoms of ASD are common and often persist or recur following diagnosis or relapse of AL. Research is urgently needed to determine the impact of interventions to prevent and treat psychological distress in this population.
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".