The Changing Face of Lung Cancer: Survivor Perspectives on Patient Engagement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective:Advances in the diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer have resulted in an increasing number of individuals living longer following their diagnosis. No longer is lung cancer the “death sentence” it once was. This initiative was designed to document the current experiences of lung cancer patients and explore the potential for patient engagement.Methods:Three avenues of investigation were undertaken: a literature review regarding lung cancer and patient engagement, an environmental scan of lung organizations and cancer societies regarding their approaches to lung cancer patient and family engagement, and in-depth interviews with lung cancer survivors and family members about their experiences and perspectives about patient engagement. Information was collated and major themes identified.Results:Evidence about the experience of lung cancer patients illustrates their needs are complex and dynamic. It also presents a clear picture of unmet physical, psychosocial, and spiritual needs. In particular, stigma is a significant issue for those diagnosed with lung cancer. Information, support, and communication play important roles in helping patients cope but access to resources remains challenging. Patients and family members expressed interest in becoming engaged in advocacy to improve care.Conclusions:The changing face of lung cancer creates the potential for lung cancer survivors to become engaged not only in participating in their own care but also become more involved in peer support and advocacy than lung cancer patients have been able to do in the past. Advances in the diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer have resulted in an increasing number of individuals living longer following their diagnosis. No longer is lung cancer the “death sentence” it once was. This initiative was designed to document the current experiences of lung cancer patients and explore the potential for patient engagement. Three avenues of investigation were undertaken: a literature review regarding lung cancer and patient engagement, an environmental scan of lung organizations and cancer societies regarding their approaches to lung cancer patient and family engagement, and in-depth interviews with lung cancer survivors and family members about their experiences and perspectives about patient engagement. Information was collated and major themes identified. Evidence about the experience of lung cancer patients illustrates their needs are complex and dynamic. It also presents a clear picture of unmet physical, psychosocial, and spiritual needs. In particular, stigma is a significant issue for those diagnosed with lung cancer. Information, support, and communication play important roles in helping patients cope but access to resources remains challenging. Patients and family members expressed interest in becoming engaged in advocacy to improve care. The changing face of lung cancer creates the potential for lung cancer survivors to become engaged not only in participating in their own care but also become more involved in peer support and advocacy than lung cancer patients have been able to do in the past.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Review About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Not applicable | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Review About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Other design | low |
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.
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".