Exploring Adolescents' Cancer Journey Through Photovoice: A Narrative Synthesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Photovoice is a novel and promising intervention for working with youth in healthcare settings. Despite this, few studies have examined the efficacy of photovoice as a clinical tool for working with teenagers who are on their cancer journey. To better understand the needs of teenagers with cancer and the ways that photovoice can be utilized to address these needs, a systematic review of the literature was undertaken. METHODS: Keyword searches of six databases were completed, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Social Work Abstracts, Sociological Abstracts, and Health and Psychosocial Instruments. Searches were limited to articles focusing on the psychosocial needs of adolescents, aged 13-17, who were on active cancer treatment. RESULTS: Sixty-four articles were identified that discussed the psychosocial needs of teenagers on active cancer treatment. The needs of these teenagers can be understood as being influenced by the physical changes and symptoms, psychological impact of diagnosis and treatment, short- and long-term social impacts of cancer, impact on holistic well-being, and need for clear, age-appropriate communication. Among these articles, only four articles used photovoice as a methodology and none examined the impact of photovoice as an intervention for teenagers who were currently on active treatment. CONCLUSION: Photovoice is uniquely positioned among other psychosocial interventions to help address the needs of teenagers on their cancer journey. Despite this, few researchers have examined the efficacy of photovoice as a psychosocial intervention for teenagers who are currently on active treatment.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".