MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Illness intrusiveness and subjective well-being in patients with glioblastoma multiforme.

2012· article· en· W2883524169 on OpenAlexaff
Linda Coate, Kim Edelstein, Christine Massey, Natalie Jewitt, Warren Mason, Gerald M. Devins

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchUniversity of TorontoPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineMoodDepression (economics)Quality of life (healthcare)Affect (linguistics)DiseaseOncologyPsychiatryPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

2063 Background: Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is the most common adult CNS malignancy. The quality-of-life (QOL) impact of its neurological sequelae and poor prognosis is poorly understood. In this study we examined relations between disease severity and mood in GBM patients. Methods: GBM patients (n=73) completed validated questionnaires examining depression (CESD), positive affect (ABS), illness intrusiveness (II), and health-related QOL (EORTC-QLQ30, BN-20). Median age was 53 years (range 26-75), median time since diagnosis was 1.1 years (range 0.1-12.4). 88% were on temozolomide. Questionnaire scores were compared to normative data from GI, GU, Breast, Head and Neck, Lymphoma, and Lung cancer groups using t-tests. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses tested the impact of disease severity indicators (ECOG; Symptoms, derived from QLQ30, BN20) and potential moderators on mood and whether II mediates those effects. Results: GBM patients reported less positive affect, more depression and greater II than other cancer patients (p<.05). Increase in symptoms correlated with greater II (β=.59; 95% CI [.31, .87], p<.0001) and depression (β=.37; 95% CI [.20, .55], p<.0001) and less positive affect (β=-.04; 95% CI [-.08, -.01], p=.02). Surprisingly, higher ECOG (i.e., poorer performance status) was associated with less II (β=-3.58; 95%CI [-7.06, -.10], p=.04) and depression (β=-2.20; 95%CI [-4.21, -.19], p=.03). II partially mediated the relations between disease severity and mood, evidenced by the change in the disease severity coefficient when II was added to the models (mean change measured by bootstrap sampling: CESD=.23, 95% CI [.06, .43]; ABS=.21, 95%CI [.02, .44]). The occurrence of other stressful life events was associated with II (β=2.73; 95% CI [.43, 5.02], p=.02), but there was no evidence of a moderating effect on this or any other relationship (p>.05). Conclusions: GBM patients are more distressed than other cancer patients. GBM-induced lifestyle disruptions partially mediate the association between disease severity and subjective well-being. Efforts to engage patients in valued activities and interests, despite the constraints, can help to preserve QOL.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.350 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→