MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3183334809 · doi:10.1186/s40814-021-00878-0

Protocol for mapping psychosocial screening to resources in pediatric oncology: a pilot randomized controlled trial

2021· article· en· W3183334809 on OpenAlexafffund
Léandra Desjardins, Kelly Hancock, Péter Szatmári, Sarah Alexander, Wendy Shama, Claire De Souza, Denise Mills, Oussama Abla, Maru Barrera

Bibliographic record

VenuePilot and Feasibility Studies · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
FundersCundill Centre for Child and Youth Depression
KeywordsPsychosocialMedicineRandomized controlled trialMental healthIntervention (counseling)DistressProtocol (science)Family medicineClinical trialPsychiatryClinical psychologyAlternative medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: A pediatric cancer diagnosis and its treatment can have a detrimental effect on the mental health of children and their families. Screening to identify psychosocial risk in families has been recognized as a standard of care in pediatric oncology, but there has been limited clinical application of this standard thus far. A significant impediment to the implementation of psychosocial screening is the dearth of information on how to translate psychosocial screening to clinical practice, and specifically, how to follow-up from screening results. This manuscript aims to describe a protocol of a new intervention examining the feasibility and acceptability of mapping via a Psychosocial Navigator (PSN) psychosocial screening results to specific recommendations of resources for families based on measured risk for psychosocial distress and mental health symptoms. METHODS: The pilot randomized control trial (RCT) consists of dyads of youth (10-17 years) newly diagnosed with cancer and their primary caregiver. This RCT includes two arms (intervention and control group), with each group completing measurements near diagnosis and 1 year later. After the initial assessment, dyads in the intervention group receive monthly screening results and recommendations from the study PSN that are tailored to these results. The patient's primary healthcare team (nurse, social worker, oncologist) also receive the risk, distress, and mental health results as well as the recommendations from the PSN. DISCUSSION: This study addresses a significant barrier to the implementation of psychosocial screening in pediatric oncology: specifically, the limited knowledge of how to follow-up from screening results. Findings from this pilot will inform a future definitive RCT to test the effectiveness of the intervention on patient and family mental health outcomes. This project has implications for enhancing clinical care in pediatric oncology, as well as other pediatric populations. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS OF THIS STUDY: This is the first study of screening and follow-up using a psychosocial navigator. This study involves both patient and caregiver report. The small sample size necessitates a future larger study to investigate the effects of intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04132856 , Registered 10 October 2019-retrospectively registered.

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)0.034
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.264

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0340.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.005
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0070.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0790.010

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 head0.285
GPT teacher head0.476
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePilot and Feasibility StudiesSame topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207