The psychological projective test Wartegg-Zeichentest: A contribution to the knowledge of patient with cancer—The experience of two Italian centers.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
e20650 Background: There is growing recognition that psychological implications are important in the comprehensive care of cancer patients (pts); the personality conformation may be an useful and constructive tool ground in order to promote psychic adaptation to cancer, improve communication with patient and keep a good level of quality of life. Methods: A personality projective test, the Wartegg-Zeichentest (WZT), was administered to cancer pts at the start of chemotherapy, in two Italian Oncology Departments from February 2010 to August 2012. During treatment, quality of life level with the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) and the possible presence of psychological disorder with the Psychological Distress Inventary (PDI) were also evaluated. Each patient followed a psychological support program. Results: Overall, 106 pts were enrolled. 47 (44%) received adjuvant chemotherapy, while palliative treatment was delivered in the remaining 59 (56%) cases. 39 (37%) pts showed ESAS values related to a poor quality of life, and PDI scores showed the presence of moderate-severe psychological disorders in 38 (35%) pts. Considering both test (ESAS e PDI), 24% of subjects had poor quality of life and moderate to severe psychological disorders. In this subgroup, 81% of pts showed a WZT profile characterized by depressive tendencies, liabilities, inhibition and passiveness behaviour. There was a significant correlation between ESAS and WZT (p<0.001), and between PDI and WZT (p<0.001). WZT had a predictive role in disclosing susceptibility to psychological disorders and treatment compliance. Conclusions: Cancer diagnosis affects perception of reality and discloses in some pts a personality profile characterized by depression, demoralization, inhibition and passiveness behaviour. This group of pts may be more keen to develop physic and psychological distress following cancer diagnosis and treatment. Early evaluation by WZT may be a useful instrument in preventing patient distress, as well in promoting the adaptation process to illness and maintaining a better level of quality of life.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".