MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3169372899 · doi:10.3390/jcm10122628

Biopsychosocial Factors Associated with Supportive Care Needs in Canadian Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer Survivors

2021· article· en· W3169372899 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Steven Guirguis, Margaret I. Fitch, Manjula Maganti, Abha A. Gupta, Norma Mammone D’Agostino, Chana Korenblum, Jennifer M. Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationUniversity of TorontoHospital for Sick ChildrenPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
FundersPartenariat Canadien Contre Le Cancer
KeywordsMedicineBiopsychosocial modelNeeds assessmentSurvivorship curvePopulationGerontologyQuality of life (healthcare)Cancer survivorFamily medicineCancerNursingPsychiatryEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adolescents and young adults (AYAs) represent an overlooked population in cancer survivorship care. Identifying the needs of AYAs can guide the development of tailored programs for this population. We conducted a cross-sectional descriptive analysis to identify biopsychosocial factors associated with AYA post-treatment supportive care needs and unmet needs using data obtained from the Experiences of Cancer Patients in Transitions Study of the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer, in collaboration with cancer agencies in the 10 Canadian provinces. The analysis focused on data from n = 530 AYAs between the ages of 18 and 34 who had undergone treatment within the past 5 years. Respondents reported a median of two moderate to big (MTB) physical needs (out of 9) and one unmet physical need, two MTB emotional needs (out of 6) with two unmet MTB emotional needs, and one (out of 5) practical need reported and one unmet MTB practical need. We found some common associations across supportive care domains. Income (lower) and more complex treatment were associated with high needs and unmet needs across the three domains. Respondents with a family doctor who was “very involved” in their cancer care had a lower number of unmet physical and emotional needs. Identifying those at risk of supportive care needs and developing tailored pathways in which they are proactively connected with tailored and appropriate resources and programs may help to reduce the number of unmet needs and improve cancer survivors’ quality of life.

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)0.003
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 score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.150

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.343 · 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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical MedicineSame topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207