Contributing Factors of Unmet Needs Among Young Adult Survivors of Childhood Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia with Comorbidities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to: (1) describe the domains and levels of unmet needs of young adult survivors of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia (cALL) with comorbidities, and (2) to explore the factors associated with higher levels of unmet needs. Unmet need was considered as supportive care needs not met. Methods: The most vulnerable cALL survivors from the PETALE study cohort completed the Short-Form Survivor Unmet Needs Survey, the Brief Pain Inventory and the 15D instrument of health-related quality of life. Demographic and clinical information, including comorbidities, were obtained from medical records or self-reporting. The participants' needs and contributing factors to their needs were evaluated using nonparametric tests. Results: Of the 72 participants, 9 (13%) reported moderate/high levels of overall unmet needs. “Worry about earning money” (56%) and “Dealing with feeling tired” (51%) were the most frequent unmet needs (all levels combined). The factors associated significantly with any domain of unmet needs were: having a comorbidity, reporting altered functional health status, high ALL risk status, pain, age (<26 years), and having previously received psychological support. Conclusion: A minority of young adult survivors of cALL with comorbidities interviewed reported moderate/high levels of unmet needs. However, financial concerns and emotional health and relationship are the two domains of greatest need. Survivors with altered health condition are most at risk of experiencing moderate/high levels of unmet needs. If confirmed in larger samples, interventions should target modifiable contributors of unmet needs such as physical health and comfort, fatigue, and emotional health.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".