An Educational Program to Help Patients Manage Androgen Deprivation Therapy Side Effects: Feasibility, Acceptability, and Preliminary Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), a common treatment for prostate cancer, is associated with physical, psychological, and sexual side effects that reduce patients' quality of life. The authors designed an educational program to prepare patients for managing these side effects. This paper describes an implementation model for national dissemination of the program, testing its feasibility and acceptability at the institutional and patient level. Postprogram changes in patients' self-efficacy to manage side effects and side effect bother are also explored. Patients on or anticipating ADT enrolled in the educational program. Pre and post intervention questionnaires measured patient satisfaction with the program, side effect bother, and self-efficacy to manage ADT side effects. The ADT Educational Program was deemed feasible and acceptable. Five of six targeted sites successfully launched the program with sufficient patient enrolment. Patient attendees were highly satisfied. Self-efficacy, bother, and use of management strategies were interrelated. Lower bother was associated with increased self-efficacy and more use of management strategies, and increased bother was associated with lower self-efficacy and less use of management strategies. Based on pre-post scores, improvements in patients' self-efficacy to manage ADT side effects were also observed. Results demonstrate that this brief educational program is feasible and acceptable to patients and cancer care institutions. The program appears to promote self-efficacy and the uptake of ADT management strategies for ADT side effects. The results of this study support the program implementation and suggest that improvements in self-efficacy after program participation may help patients adapt to ADT side effects.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".