Articulating viewpoints to better define and respond to the needs of adolescents and young adult survivors of pediatric brain tumors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Adolescents and young adult survivors of pediatric brain tumors (AYA-PBTS) often experience difficulties with social skills, pursuit of studies and employment. This study explored pediatric long-term survivors' perspective on their post-treatment needs and ways to improve resources and interventions. METHODS: We used an original method of three sequential focus group interviews by adding the perspectives of survivors (15-22 years), parents and health professionals (total N = 22). Participants were recruited using purposive sampling from the long-term follow-up clinic at a Canadian tertiary hospital. We used computer-assisted analysis to draw themes from each group and compare thematic content across groups. RESULTS: Categorization of participants' responses resulted in three domains: personal life, education and work. Participants mentioned the improvement of communication tools to facilitate access to timely information, the organization of counseling to improve employment integration, and tailoring interventions to optimize the return to daily activities in aftercare. Subsequent inductive analysis revealed three overarching trends among groups: multipurpose social networking, AYA-PBTS-specific information websites and transition tools and procedures. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PSYCHOSOCIAL PROVIDERS: This study identified solutions for AYA-PBTS' specific needs in aftercare. This population needs up-to-date post-treatment information and refined outreach procedures. Future research should define and prioritize these suggested solutions.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".