Apetite e sintomas de impacto nutricional de mulheres com câncer ginecológico
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Changes in appetite are common and worrying in cancer patients and significantly impact nutritional status. This study aimed to verify the relationship among appetite/symptoms and the sociodemographic, clinical and nutritional status of women diagnosed with gynecological cancer without antineoplastic treatment treated at Barretos Cancer Hospital. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study with a non-probabilistic sample design, conducted between January and September 2017. This study comprised sociodemographic, clinical, nutritional status and appetite/ symptoms. Nutritional assessment was performed using the body mass index (BMI) and the PatientGenerated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA). To assess appetite and symptoms, the Cancer Appetite and Symptom Questionnaire (CASQ) instrument was used. For associations of interest, the chi-square test was used. A significance level of 5% was adopted. Results: 171 women with a mean age of 52.32 ± 14.95 years participated, most of them diagnosed with cervical cancer (56.6%). Although the predominance in this study is women with moderate appetite/symptom impairment, it was not related to sociodemographic and clinical variables, nor was it associated with nutritional status assessed by BMI. However, a significant association was found between appetite/symptoms and nutritional status assessed by PG-SGA (p = 0.033). Conclusion: Appetite impairment and presence of symptoms were not related to the sociodemographic and clinical variables studied in women diagnosed with treatment-naive gynecological cancer. Significant association was found between CASQ and nutritional status assessed by PG-SGA.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.008 | 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".