MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mild to Moderate Cognitive Impairment Does Not Affect the Ability to Self-Report Important Symptoms in Patients With Cancer: A Prospective Longitudinal Multinational Study (EPCCS)

2020· article· en· W3010819392 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Magnus Ekström, Sebastian Palmqvist, David C. Currow, Per Sjøgren, Geana Paula Kurita, Gunnhild Jakobsen, Stein Kaasa, Marianne Jensen Hjermstad

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pain and Symptom Management · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer-related cognitive impairment studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSt. Olavs Hospital Universitetssykehuset i TrondheimRigshospitaletVetenskapsrådetBispebjerg HospitalSvenska Sällskapet för Medicinsk ForskningUniversity of NottinghamUniversity of LeedsHjärt-LungfondenNorges Teknisk-Naturvitenskapelige Universitet
KeywordsMedicineAffect (linguistics)Cognitive impairmentProspective cohort studyCognitionLongitudinal studyMultinational corporationClinical psychologyGerontologyOncologyPsychiatryInternal medicinePathologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT: Patients with advanced cancer commonly suffer from both distressing symptoms and cognitive impairment, but the effect of cognitive impairment on the reliability and validity of symptom self-report is unknown. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the reliability and validity of symptom self-report in cancer outpatients with and without mild to moderate cognitive impairment. METHODS: This was an analysis of the longitudinal European Palliative Care Cancer Symptom study of adults with incurable cancer in specialized palliative care (30 centers across 12 countries). Patients who could not comply with the study because of severe cognitive impairment were excluded. Cognitive status on the Mini-Mental State Examination short version and nine symptoms (pain, tiredness, drowsiness, nausea, appetite, breathlessness, depression, anxiety, and well-being) using the revised Edmonton Symptom Assessment System were self-reported at baseline and one-month follow-up. Reliability was analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficients and validity using regression of each symptom with health-related quality of life (HrQoL) measured with European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 15 for Palliative Care. RESULTS: A total of 1047 patients were included: mean age of 62.9 years; 54.4% women; main cancer types were of digestive organs (26.6%), breast (21.6%), and lungs (21.2%). Cognitive impairment was present in 181 (17.3%) at baseline and associated with worse self-reported tiredness, drowsiness, appetite, and depression. Reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient) and validity (associations with HrQoL) were similar between people with/without cognitive impairment across the nine symptoms, except breathlessness, which showed a weaker relation to HrQoL in patients with cognitive impairment. Findings were robust in sensitivity analyses and after controlling for potential confounders. CONCLUSION: In advanced cancer, self-report of nine major symptoms was reliable and valid also in people with mild-to-moderate cognitive impairment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov database (NCT01362816).

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.726

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.269 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations6
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pain and Symptom ManagementSame topicCancer-related cognitive impairment studiesFrench-language works237,207