MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3089047305 · doi:10.34141/ljcs8421479

Distrés en el cuidador primario del paciente adulto con enfermedad oncológica avanzada

2020· article· en· W3089047305 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sofía Sánchez-Román, Jessica Mejía-Castrejón, Diana Montelongo-Niño, Vania Barrientos-Casarrubias, Cristina Beltrán-Zavala, Itzel Alfaro-Espejel, Paulina Quiróz-Friedman, Diana Pacheco-Arroyo, Argelia Lara-Solares, Guadalupe Rivera-Cuevas, Erwin Chiquete

Bibliographic record

VenueLatin American Journal of Clinical Sciences and Medical Technology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDistressMedicineFamily caregiversEmotional distressClinical psychologyGerontologyPsychiatryAnxiety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background. Distress is an unpleasant emotional experience of psychological, social or spiritual nature, which can interfere with the ability to cope. Objective. To describe the distress phenomenology in primary caregivers of adults with advanced cancer. Material and Methods. In this descriptive cross-sectional study we evaluated adults with advanced oncologic disease and their primary caregivers. A structured interview and clinimetric instruments (Palliative Performance Scale, Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale, and The Distress Thermometer) were applied to estimate the frequency and severity of distress in both groups. We also examined possible variables associated with distress. Results. Information on 87 patient-caregiver dyads (n=174) was analyzed. Age was significantly lower in caregivers than in patients. Approximately half of the caregivers had a paid job; 38 % was a homemaker. The prevalence of distress was significantly higher among caregivers than their patients (86.2 % vs. 71.3 %, respectively; p=0.01). According to the caregivers, the main problems linked to distress were emotional (62 %) and practical (40 %); which contrasts with the patients, who claimed the main problems were physical (57 %), followed by emotional (36 %). Conclusions. The prevalence of distress among caregivers of patients with advanced disease is very high. Moreover, the frequency of perceived distress in caregivers is higher than their respective patients. The most heavily affected domain, perceived by caregivers is emotional, while in the patients it is mainly physical.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.369 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLatin American Journal of Clinical Sciences and Medical Technology→Same topicCancer survivorship and care→French-language works237,207→