Values of Retinoblastoma Survivors and Parents Regarding Treatment Outcomes: A Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Retinoblastoma is an aggressive pediatric eye cancer. Patient-reported outcome measures reveal important insights into how patients perceive their own health. Currently, there is no widely used or validated measure for assessment of retinoblastoma outcomes. The purpose of this research was to uncover which treatment outcomes that retinoblastoma survivors and their parents value, to inform the development of a future measure. METHODS: This qualitative, cross-sectional study included retinoblastoma survivors age 6 years and older and parents of retinoblastoma survivors. Participants who did not demonstrate fluency in English were excluded. Study participants participated in semistructured interviews or focus groups, either in person at The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada, or through secure videoconference, between March 3, 2019, and January 25, 2020. Iterative rounds of opening coding, codebook development, and coresearcher analysis were used to identify key emergent themes and subthemes. RESULTS: Seventeen adults participated in six focus groups. Nine pediatric survivors participated in individual interviews. Four common themes emerged from all participant groups: (1) definition of treatment success, (2) enucleation-acceptance and challenges, (3) treatment outcomes to measure, and (4) need for outcome reporting. An additional, unique theme was identified in all pediatric discussions: worries and coping mechanisms. Treatment outcomes deemed valuable were related to the following domains: psychosocial outcomes, daily functioning, functional vision, retinoblastoma education, cosmetic outcomes, and secondary eye conditions. CONCLUSION: This study represents the first stage in the development of a retinoblastoma-specific patient-reported outcome measure. The findings reveal insight into what outcomes are valued by survivors after treatment and offer promise to improve outcomes assessment for retinoblastoma.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".