MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Patient-reported psychosocial needs and psychological distress: the influence on survival in geriatric oncology patients.

2018· article· en· W2889788441 on OpenAlexaffabout
Bonnie Leung, Aria Shokoohi, Alan Bates, Cheryl Ho

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePsychosocialInternal medicineLung cancerUnivariate analysisDepression (economics)AnxietyCancerProportional hazards modelDiseaseBreast cancerDistressMultivariate analysisPsychiatryClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

10033 Background: Little is known about how psychosocial factors and distress affect geriatric oncology patients and their survival. The study goals were: review patient-reported needs from all cancer types; identify factors associated with increased risk for psychological distress, defined as moderate to severe anxiety (ANX) and depression (DEP); and determine whether ANX and DEP are independent prognostic variables for patients ≥65 years. Methods: All patients ≥65 years, referred to BC Cancer from 2011 – 2016 who completed the Psychosocial Screen for Cancer (PSSCAN-R) and the Canadian Problem Checklist (CPC) within 6 m of cancer diagnosis were included in the study. Baseline demographics and disease characteristics were collected retrospectively. Univariate analysis using the X2 test were used to compare patient groups. OS was calculated using the Kaplan Meier method and compared using the log rank test. MVA conducted using Cox-regression analysis. Results: 26, 323 patients were included in the analysis. Baseline characteristics: female 50%; age 65-69 29%, 70-79 46%, ≥80 27%; GI 20%, Breast 18%, GU 16%, Lung 16%, Other 29%; M0 66%, M1 19%, MX 15%. Patients presenting with ANX and DEP were more likely to be female, be aged 65 to 69, have lung cancer and metastatic disease (p-values < 0.001). Patients reporting emotional, informational, physical, and social/family problems or needs were more likely to present with ANX and DEP (p < 0.001). Median OS ANX 34 m vs no symptoms 43 m (p < 0.001) and DEP 31m vs no symptoms 43m (p < 0.001). MVA including age, sex, M status, ANX, DEP showed all variables were statistically significant; increasing age HR 1.05, male vs female HR 1.11, M1 vs M0 HR 3.62, ANX vs no symptoms HR 1.30, DEP vs no symptoms HR 1.50. Conclusions: Geriatric oncology patients who are female, are aged 65-69, have metastatic disease or lung cancer are at risk for distress. ANX and DEP are independent prognostic variables, negatively impacting survival. This vulnerable cohort of geriatric oncology patients should receive psychological support and follow up to better improve survival.

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 score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.367 · 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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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