Acceptance of Psycho-Oncological Counseling Formats in a Cancer Counseling Center during the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Exploratory Care Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic made it necessary to change established structures of medical counseling services and quickly establish digital counseling formats to ensure continuity of care. In this context, we offered telephone and video-telephonic counseling in addition to traditional face-to-face counseling in the office. Methods: Patients (n = 100) of the Cancer Counseling Center, Tübingen, were asked to complete a questionnaire to assess the acceptance of the counseling format following each counseling session (office, telephone, and video) in the period between July 2020 and February 2021. The questionnaire included the subject areas of patient characterization, assessment of therapeutic contact, therapeutic relationship, and hurdles and was used in this exploratory care study. Results: The satisfaction and acceptance of the three counseling formats (office, telephone, and video) were rated as “good” to “very good” in the three subgroups (range 1–6, office M = 1.2, telephone M = 1.3, video M = 1.4). Likewise, the “therapeutic relationship” achieved high ratings in terms of establishment of a therapeutic relationship in all three subgroups (office M = 5.7, telephone M = 5.0, video M = 5.0). The type of contact (office and video counseling) achieved a significant main effect on the therapeutic relationship for items such as “I believe that counseling is helping me” (F(2,97) = 4.80, p = 0.01) and “I feel that I can rely on the counselor/therapist” (F(2,97) = 3.29, p = 0.04). The “hurdles” were rated as minor and tolerable (office M = 1.3, telephone M = 1.3, video M = 1.4). Predictor analyses showed that there was no effect of age and gender on the acceptance of digital counseling formats in the present sample. Discussion and Conclusion: On the basis of this survey, it can be concluded that digital counseling formats were perceived by patients as a promising addition to the classic face-to-face setting. In addition, it can be stated that the digital formats (telephone and video) were not generally preferred to face-to-face counseling, but that the innovative telecounseling was accepted and perceived with great satisfaction and acceptance. Accordingly, the additional use of digital counseling formats could be an opportunity to enrich and expand the existing presence structures also after the COVID-19 pandemic.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".