MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Demographic, socioeconomic, and clinical factors associated with oncology patient experience in the Ontario cancer system.

2020· article· en· W3092074431 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mary Mahler, Brett Nicholls, Catherine Chan, Narges Nazeri-Rad, Kelvin Chan, Simron Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPatient Satisfaction in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreCancer Care OntarioUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSocioeconomic statusCancerHealth careLogistic regressionFamily medicinePatient experienceDiseaseInternal medicineImmigrationDemographyGerontologyPopulationEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

160 Background: Your Voice Matters (YVM) is an electronic real time Patient Reported Experience Measure (PREM) collected on all adult patients accessing cancer services in Ontario by Cancer Care Ontario/Ontario Health. To our knowledge, this is the largest oncology PREM dataset worldwide. A total of 25 Items are assessed including care coordination, wait times, access to care and satisfaction with healthcare providers. We attempted to identify demographic, socioeconomic and disease factors that predict for a positive patient experience. Methods: Responses were collated from 18 individual cancer centers between Jan 2017 and Dec 2019. Each item was dichotomized into positive/negative experiences. Multivariable logistic regression was constructed for each of the 25 items. Results: Demographics are described in table. Males (OR=1.11, p=0.0032), genitourinary patients (OR=1.30, p=0.0031) and those receiving radiation (OR=1.39, p=<0.0001) were more likely to have a positive experience. Patients aged 18-39 (OR=0.74, p=<0.0001), receiving chemotherapy (OR=0.76, p=0.0002), and with central nervous system or lung cancer (OR= 0.56, p=<0.001; OR=0.79 p=0.0059, respectively) were more likely to have a negative experience. Lowest income patients were more likely to have a negative experience with healthcare providers (OR=0.83, p=0.0119) and patients from the highest immigration areas had a worse quality experience (OR=0.82, p=0.0029). Conclusions: Age, sex, disease site, visit type, income and immigration status significantly influence patients cancer care experience. This information helps promote equity and the use of PREM data to improve cancer care delivery. [Table: see text]

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)0.000
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 score0.245
Threshold uncertainty score0.494

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.436
GPT teacher head0.575
Teacher spread0.139 · 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicPatient Satisfaction in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207