MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Comparing cancer survivors' perceptions on lifestyle behaviors between adolescent-young adult (AYA) and middle-aged patients (pts).

2020· article· en· W3092071285 on OpenAlexaff
Spencer Soberano, Lawson Eng, Ruiqi Chen, Ashraf Altesha, Subiksha Nagaratnam, Sarah Rudolph-Naiberg, Simren Chotai, Wanning Wang, Lu Lin, Wei Xu, Katrina Hueniken, Catherine Brown, Geoffrey Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth and Wellbeing Research
Canadian institutionsOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchUniversity of TorontoPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLogistic regressionSurvivorship curveYoung adultAlcohol consumptionCancerDemographyCancer survivorshipQuality of life (healthcare)GerontologyPhysical activityUnivariate analysisInternal medicineAlcoholMultivariate analysisPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

207 Background: Lifestyle behaviours such as smoking, physical activity, and alcohol consumption are important determinants of cancer survivorship. Previous studies have compared the lifestyle behaviours of elderly and middle-aged patients (pts), yet no studies have compared these behavioural perceptions between AYA (aged 18-39 years) to those of middle-aged pts (MA, 40-64 years). Methods: Cancer pts across various tumour types at a comprehensive cancer centre were surveyed with respect to their perceptions of how their well-being was affected by smoking, physical activity and alcohol consumption after diagnosis. Univariate logistic regression models evaluated factors associated with perceptions on the effect of various adverse lifestyle behaviours on health and well-being. Results: Of 200 AYA (57% female, 43% male) and 772 MA (56% female, 44% male) pts, a positive smoking history was reported by 33% of AYA and 48% of MA (P<0.001). At time of diagnosis, 55% of AYA and 59% of MA pts consumed alcohol, 16% of AYA and 16% of MA were ex-drinkers, and 28% of AYA and 25% of MA were never drinkers (P=0.62). Among AYA, 26% exercised compared to 20% in the MA group (P=0.19). The majority (72-92%) of pts perceived that smoking and lack of activity after cancer diagnosis negatively affected quality of life, survival chances, and fatigue; there were no significant differences between age groups. In contrast, both age cohorts displayed misperceptions about how alcohol affects health, which was characterized by perceiving neutral or beneficial influence on their overall well-being: Fifty-seven percent of MA pts had a borderline greater misperception versus 49% of AYA pts (P=0.06). Misperceptions regarding how alcohol affects survival were observed in 49% of AYA pts and 58% of MA pts (P=0.05). Misperception with respect to how alcohol affects fatigue was observed in 40% of AYA pts compared to 52% of MA pts (P=0.005). Furthermore, MA pts had 1.63 (95% CI 1.16–2.29) times the odds to have misperceptions regarding how alcohol affects fatigue, and 1.41 (95% CI 1.01–1.97) times the odds to have misperceptions on how alcohol affects survival compared to AYA pts. Conclusions: Both the AYA and MA population were not adequately informed about how alcohol affects cancer survivorship health; with more misperceptions in MA pts. Results from this study advocate for survivorship programs to implement emphasis on the deleterious effects of alcohol, with particular efforts tailored to the MA group.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.005
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 head0.340
GPT teacher head0.570
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicHealth and Wellbeing ResearchFrench-language works237,207