MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3209045051 · doi:10.5737/23688076314470475

Synthesis of self-management strategies used by young adults who have undergone hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: A narrative review

2021· review· en· W3209045051 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Billy Vinette, Hazar Mrad, Ali El-Akhras, Karine Bilodeau

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Oncology Nursing Journal · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalHôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont
FundersFondation de l’Hôpital Maisonneuve-RosemontMinistère de l'Éducation et de l'Enseignement supérieurUniversité de MontréalRéseau de recherche portant sur les interventions en sciences infirmières du QuébecTD Bank
KeywordsPsycINFOCINAHLHematopoietic stem cell transplantationTransplantationHematopoietic cellYoung adultMedicineSelf-managementNarrative reviewStem cellNarrativeMEDLINEPsychologyGerontologyHaematopoiesisIntensive care medicineInternal medicineNursingPsychological interventionBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation is frequently used to treat young adults with hematologic cancer. The treatment can cause a range of side effects that require patients to self-manage their symptoms. However, there do not seem to be any studies that review the literature on self-management strategies used by this group. The purpose of this paper is to summarize the self-management strategies used by young adults (18-39 years old) who have received a hematopoietic stem cell transplant for leukemia or lymphoma. A narrative review conducted in the CINAHL, MEDLINE and PsycINFO databases returned 11 papers. An analysis of these data shows that young adults use self-management strategies, including managing their emotions, turning to spiritual beliefs, seeking support from others and changing their behaviours. The results stress the importance of nursing care in supporting these self-management strategies used by young adults who have undergone hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.586
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.316 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Oncology Nursing JournalSame topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207