MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2892759079 · doi:10.1200/jgo.18.24900

Understanding the Experiences of Cancer Patients as They Transition From Treatment to Primary and Community Care: A Pan-Canadian Study of Over 13,000 Cancer Survivors

2018· article· en· W2892759079 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
J. Chadder, S. Zomer, Gina Lockwood, Raquel Shaw Moxam, C. Louzado, A. C. Coronado, Rami Rahal, E. Green

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Global Oncology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCancerFamily medicineProstate cancerBreast cancerPopulationHealth careColorectal cancerCancer survivorDiseaseGerontologyInternal medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Being diagnosed with cancer can be overwhelming, with many physical and emotional challenges. As needs of survivors shift from disease management to recovery, the adjustment is often not seamless. Ideally, a health care system is integrated and responsive to the needs of survivors, however, when cancer treatment is complete, they often face lingering concerns. Limited patient-reported data were available in Canada on experiences and barriers survivors face posttreatment. Aim: The Experiences of Cancer Patients in Transition study is the first national survey gathering data from cancer survivors in Canada as they transition from cancer care to the broader health care system. Methods: A survey was developed in consultation with patients/survivors, health care providers and researchers to address experiences related to physical, emotional, informational and practical needs. Ethics approvals were obtained and 10 provinces participated. Cancer survivors expected to have completed treatment within 1-3 years were identified from provincial cancer registries. Included were those aged 30+ at diagnosis of nonmetastatic breast, colorectal, prostate, melanoma or hematologic cancer; or aged 15-29 at diagnosis of any nonmetastatic cancer or metastatic testicular cancer. Despite the intention of the sampling, the final sample included some survivors diagnosed with a site other than the target sites, and some whose time since treatment was outside 1-3 years. All respondents are included in this analysis. Results are not weighted to represent the true distribution of cancer survivors. Results: From a total survey population of 40,790 Canadian cancer survivors, 33% completed the survey. The respondents were 48% male, 51% female; 2.5% were under 30 years old, 60% were 65+. 68% of respondents reported challenging periods posttreatment, with 48% of these saying that the first 6 months to 1 year were most challenging. Cancer survivors continued to live with side-effects: 87% reported physical challenges; 78% reported emotional challenges; 45% reported practical challenges. The most prevalent concerns were fatigue (68%), anxiety about cancer returning (68%) and returning to work/school (23%). Less than half of those with emotional or practical concerns received useful information (42% and 46%, respectively). 42% of respondents could not get help to address their most difficult concern. Of those who could get help, 10.7% waited a year or more. Conclusion: The results provide insight into the nature of challenges cancer survivors face, as well as needed supports and barriers faced in accessing them. There is a clear need for health systems to ensure a seamless patient experience throughout the cancer journey, for instance, through development and adoption of resources to help health care providers and their patients identify and address challenges from diagnosis through to survivorship.

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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.143

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0070.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.301 · 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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Global OncologySame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207