MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3030569139 · doi:10.3747/co.27.6643

Impact of COVID-19 on Canadian Medical Oncologists and Cancer Care: Canadian Association of Medical Oncologists Survey Report

2020· article· en· W3030569139 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Sharlene Gill, David Hao, Hal W. Hirte, Alexi Campbell, Brian Colwell

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 and healthcare impacts
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityCanadian Association of Occupational TherapistsUniversity of CalgaryCanadian Medical AssociationJuravinski Cancer CentreBC Cancer FoundationUniversity of British ColumbiaBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFeelingFamily medicinePersonal protective equipmentAnxietyPandemicDepression (economics)DemographicsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)CancerPsychiatryInternal medicinePsychologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The covid-19 pandemic has presented unprecedented professional and personal challenges for the oncology community. Under the auspices of the Canadian Association of Medical Oncologists, we conducted an online national survey to better understand the impact of the pandemic on the medical oncology community in Canada. Methods: An English-language multiple-choice survey, including questions about demographics, covid-19 risk, use of personal protective equipment (ppe), personal challenges, and chemotherapy management was distributed to Canadian medical oncologists. The survey was open from 30 March to 4 April 2020, and attracted 159 responses. Results: More than 70% of medical oncologists expressed moderate-to-extreme concern about personally contracting covid-19 and about family members or patients (or both) contracting covid-19 from them. Despite that high level of concern, considerable variability in the use of ppe in direct cancer care was reported at the time of this survey, with 33% of respondents indicating no routine ppe use at their institutions and 69% indicating uncertainty about access to adequate ppe. Of the respondents, 54% were experiencing feelings of nervousness or anxiety on most days, and 52% were having feelings of depression or hopelessness on at least some days. Concern about aging parents or family and individual wellness represented the top personal challenges identified. The management of cancer patients has been affected, with adoption of telemedicine reported by 82% of respondents, and cessation of clinical trial accrual reported by 54%. The 3 factors deemed most important for treatment decision-making were■ cancer prognosis and anticipated benefit from treatment,■ risk of treatment toxicity during scarce health care access, and■ patient risk of contracting covid-19. Conclusions: This report describes the results of the first national survey assessing the impact of the covid-19 on Canadian medical oncologists and how they deliver systemic anticancer therapies. We hope that these data will provide a framework to address the challenges identified.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.060
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient 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 score0.192
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.060
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 integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.280
GPT teacher head0.555
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations49
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent OncologySame topicCOVID-19 and healthcare impactsFrench-language works237,207