Clinical and demographic variables of young adult (YA) patients referred to inpatient supportive care.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
168 Background: Literature suggests that YA cancer patients have unique psychosocial issues and more emotional distress compared to older aged patients. Our study aimed to evaluate clinical and demographic factors of YA cancer patients that may impact physical and psychosocial symptom expression. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted on randomly selected patients seen during 2013-2015 of 3 age groups: 18-39 (YA), 40-64, and 65 and older on demographic, medical, psychosocial history, Morphine Equivalent Daily Dose (MEDD), Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scare (ESAS) scores, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) scores which are completed at time of initial consultation with the supportive care inpatient mobile team. Results: 896 (YA = 297, 40-64 cohort = 300, 65 and older = 299) patients were reviewed. YA cohort was associated with being female (n = 179 (60%), p = 0.03), more frequently non-white (Black and Hispanic = 124 (42%), p < 0.00), higher ECOG scores (ECOG 0-2 = 83(39%), p < 0.00) more psychiatric history (n = 95(32%), p = 0.00) and worse ESAS sleep scores (median = 6, p = 0.02). The YA cohort also had higher pain expression than the 65 and older cohort (p = .02). The YA group was more likely to have children younger than 18 years old (n = 171(58%), p < 0.00). Patients with children less than 18 years of age reported higher pain expression (median = 6, p = .05), sleep (median = 6, p = 0.01), and financial distress (median = 2, p = 0.02). Conclusions: Contrary to other findings, YA cancer patients did not report higher symptoms or distress when compared to older age cohorts, with the exception of higher insomnia compared to other age cohorts and higher pain expression than the oldest age cohort. YA with young children reported higher level of pain, sleep and financial distress. Our findings suggest that the YA population may benefit from specialized psychosocial services to address their unique social needs, particularly to address concerns related to being parents of young children.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".