Feasibility and acceptability of hypnosis-derived communication administered by trained nurses to improve patient well-being during outpatient chemotherapy: a pilot-controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This pilot-controlled trial aimed to examine the feasibility and acceptability of hypnosis-derived communication (HC) administered by trained nurses during outpatient chemotherapy to optimize symptom management and emotional support - two important aspects of patient well-being in oncology. METHODS: The trial was conducted in two outpatient oncology units: (1) intervention site (usual care with HC), and (2) control site (usual care). Nurses at the intervention site were invited to take part in an 8-h training in HC. Participants' self-ratings of symptoms and emotional support were gathered at predetermined time points during three consecutive outpatient visits using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale and the Emotional Support Scale. RESULTS: Forty-nine patients (24 in the intervention group, 25 in the control group) with different cancer types/stages were recruited over a period of 3 weeks and completed the study. All nurses (N = 10) at the intervention site volunteered to complete the training and were able to include HC into their chemotherapy protocols (about ± 5 min/intervention). Compared to usual care, patients exposed to HC showed a significant reduction in physical symptoms during chemotherapy. In contrast, perception of emotional support did not show any significant effect of the intervention. Participants exposed to HC report that the intervention helped them relax and connect on a more personal level with the nurse during chemotherapy infusion. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that HC is feasible, acceptable, and beneficial for symptom management during outpatient chemotherapy. While future studies are needed, hypnosis techniques could facilitate meaningful contacts between cancer patients and clinicians in oncology. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trial Identifier: NCT04173195, first posted on November 19, 2019.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".