MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3187838161 · doi:10.1055/s-0041-1730091

Barriers and Support-System while Considering Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplant (HSCT): A Qualitative Study of Pre-HSCT Acute Leukemia Patients from a Standalone Transplant Laboratory in India

2021· article· en· W3187838161 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hina Solanki, Aseem Kumar Tiwari, Naveen Vashisht, Vimarsh Raina, Girish Sharma

Bibliographic record

VenueIndian Journal of Medical and Paediatric Oncology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHematopoietic stem cell transplantationAcute leukemiaMyeloid leukemiaQualitative researchHuman leukocyte antigenLeukemiaHematopoietic stem cellFamily medicineStem cellInternal medicineTransplantationHaematopoiesisImmunologyAntigen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) is the definite treatment for acute leukemia but considering HSCT is challenging for the patients. There are many studies that have described the patients’ experience after HSCT but very few studies have reported their experience before going for HSCT and there is no published report in India on patients’ experience before HSCT. Objective We conducted a qualitative study to understand barriers, and support-system while considering HSCT and the chances of getting matched unrelated donor (MUD) for these patients. Materials and Methods The present study was a qualitative study. Demographic details of 514 patients who consented for the study were noted and the patients and their families were interviewed using a semistructured interview booklet before HSCT. The interview sessions were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed for emerging themes. The study data were analyzed using QDA Miner Lite 4.0 software (Provalis Research, Montreal, Canada). Descriptive statistics such as frequency and percentage were used. The chances of getting a human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-matched donor were also computed by “HLA-matching software.” Results Acute myeloid leukemia (64.01%) was commoner than acute lymphoid leukemia (35.99%) with male: female ratio as 1.98:1. The study showed nine themes as barriers and six themes emerged in regard to the support system for HSCT decision making. The biggest barriers identified among these patients pre-HSCT were related to cost, probability of “success of transplant,” and probable “quality of life.” The family support was the biggest support system variable followed by “treating doctor.” The chances of getting a MUD for these patients were 13.22% and 5.44% in global and Indian data pool, respectively. Conclusion Deciding upon HSCT can be challenging for patients and understanding of barriers and support-system variables among these patients would provide important insights and help design better counseling techniques for such patients of HSCT and future studies in this context.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.139
Threshold uncertainty score0.905

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndian Journal of Medical and Paediatric OncologySame topicHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationFrench-language works237,207