Longitudinal study indicating antecedent psychosocial vulnerability as predictor of anxiety disorders post‐treatment in people with head and neck cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to: (1) determine the contribution of pre-cancer psychosocial vulnerability as an independent predictor of anxiety disorder (AD) onset immediately post-treatment in patients diagnosed with a first occurrence of head and neck cancer (HNC), controlling for sociodemographics and medical variables; and (2) estimate prevalence of AD and identify trajectories from the moment of diagnosis to the immediate post-treatment (i.e., over a period of 3 months) in this population. METHODS: Two-hundred twenty-four consecutive patients (participation rate = 72%) newly diagnosed with a primary HNC were assessed with a structured clinical interview for a mental disorder, validated psychometric measures, and medical chart reviews. RESULTS: Twenty-five percent of patients presented a lifetime AD, 19.4% within 2 weeks of HNC diagnosis, and 16.6% immediately post-treatment; representing 26.7% of patients with AD at any timepoint from the moment of diagnosis to immediately post-treatment. Patients were more likely to present an AD immediately post-treatment when they: were diagnosed with advanced-stage cancer (OR = 3.40, p = 0.006), presented a upon cancer diagnosis AD (OR = 2.45, p = 0.008) and/or experienced childhood abuse (OR = 1.96, p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Several AD trajectories may arise when patients are diagnosed with primary HNC. Health professionals should address AD and screen for risk factors (i.e., advanced stage cancer, AD upon cancer diagnosis, history of childhood abuse) as early as possible to assure optimal mental health care in this vulnerable population.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".