MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3003891885 · doi:10.11622/smedj.2020007

Fear of cancer recurrence among cancer survivors in Singapore

2020· article· en· W3003891885 on OpenAlexaff
Rathi Mahendran, Liu Jl, Sangita Kuparasundram, Sébastien Simard, YH Chan, Ee Heok Kua, Konstadina Griva

Bibliographic record

VenueSingapore Medical Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
FundersSingapore Cancer Society
KeywordsMedicinePsychosocialQuality of life (healthcare)Confidence intervalOdds ratioHospital Anxiety and Depression ScaleCancerInternal medicineDistressAnxietyPathologicalDepression (economics)Logistic regressionPsychiatryClinical psychologyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) among cancer survivors is a persistent and distressing psychosocial concern that affects recovery and quality of life. The prevalence of FCR in Singapore is unknown. This cross-sectional study was designed to examine FCR and identify factors associated with FCR in mixed-cancer survivors locally. METHODS: Cancer survivors in remission (n = 404) were assessed for: FCR using the Fear of Cancer Recurrence Inventory (FCRI); emotional distress using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale; and quality of life using the World Health Organization Quality of Life-BREF. Clinical and severe/pathological FCR was determined based on the severity scale of FCRI, known as FCRI-Short Form. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to examine factors associated with FCR. RESULTS: The mean score on the FCRI was 59.5 ± 30.4. 43.6% of cancer survivors had clinical FCR and 32.1% had severe/pathological FCR. Younger age (odds ratio [OR] 0.952, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.911-0.995, p < 0.05), higher educational status (OR 2.55, 95% CI 1.15-5.65, p < 0.05) and higher levels of emotional distress (OR 1.17, 95% CI 1.10-1.24, p < 0.001) were significantly associated with severe/pathological levels of FCR. CONCLUSION: The present study is the first to determine levels of FCR among cancer survivors in Singapore. While the total FCR scores were similar to those of international studies, severe/pathological levels of FCR were found to be four times higher. These findings highlight a problem that is not widely recognised or acknowledged, but which deserves greater attention.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.144
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations40
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSingapore Medical JournalSame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207