MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3011431746 · doi:10.1002/cncr.32833

Symptom burden in patients with cancer who are experiencing unplanned hospitalization

2020· article· en· W3011431746 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Richard Newcomb, Ryan David Nipp, Lauren Waldman, Joseph A. Greer, Daniel E. Lage, Ephraim P. Hochberg, Vicki A. Jackson, Charn‐Xin Fuh, David P. Ryan, Jennifer S. Temel, Areej El‐Jawahri

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Cancer InstituteMassachusetts General HospitalLeukemia and Lymphoma Society
KeywordsMedicineCancerLogistic regressionPalliative careAnxietyDepression (economics)DistressQuartileQuality of life (healthcare)Internal medicinePhysical therapyPsychiatryConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Inpatient supportive care programs often target patients with advanced solid tumors. To the authors' knowledge, few studies to date have characterized symptom burden in hospitalized patients with potentially curable cancers. The objective of the current study was to compare symptom burden, palliative care consultation, and readmission rates in hospitalized patients by cancer type and treatment intent. METHODS: The authors conducted a single-center study of hospitalized patients with cancer between 2014 and 2017. They assessed physical symptoms using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System and psychological distress using the Patient Health Questionnaire-4 and the Primary Care PTSD (Posttraumatic Stress Disorder) Screen. Multivariate linear regression models were used to assess symptom burden, logistic regression was used to assess palliative care use, and competing risk regression was used to compare 90-day readmission risk. RESULTS: A total of 1549 patients were enrolled and surveyed. The majority of patients reported moderate to severe fatigue, poor well-being, and drowsiness with no significant differences noted by cancer type and treatment intent. Compared with other groups, patients with incurable solid cancer reported higher physical symptoms (beta coefficient [B], 4.73; P < .01) and symptoms of depression (B, 0.44; P < .01) and anxiety (B, 0.39; P < .01), but no difference in posttraumatic stress disorder. Among patients in the top quartile symptom burden according to the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System, the palliative care service was consulted in 14.7%, 7.9%, 25.0%, and 49.6%, respectively, of patients with potentially curable hematologic, potentially curable solid, incurable hematologic, and incurable solid cancers (P < .001). Compared with patients with potentially curable solid cancer, patients in each group experienced a higher risk of readmission within 90 days. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalized patients with cancer experience substantial physical and psychological symptoms. Palliative care rarely is consulted for highly symptomatic patients with potentially curable cancers. Supportive care interventions should target the needs of symptomatic patients regardless of treatment intent.

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)0.000
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.521

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations56
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancerSame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207