MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W39753241

Men's perspectives on the impact of prostate cancer: implications for oncology nurses.

2000· article· en· W39753241 on OpenAlexaffabout
Margaret I. Fitch, R. J. Gray, E. Franssen, B. Delia Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePsychosocialProstate cancerDiseaseAngerFamily medicineCancerQuality of life (healthcare)Physical therapyNursingClinical psychologyPsychiatryInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: To describe the perspectives of men with recurrent prostate cancer regarding their experiences with the disease, its impact, and the help they received and to compare these individuals to men without recurrent prostate cancer. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. SETTING: Physicians' offices and prostate cancer self-help groups in Canada. SAMPLE: A convenience sample of 120 men with recurrent prostate cancer and 845 men without recurrent disease. METHODS: A survey instrument was developed following in-depth interviews with men living with prostate cancer. The men received survey packages from their physicians or through a self-help group, completed the instrument at home, and returned it in a prestamped addressed envelope. MAIN RESEARCH VARIABLES: Impact on lifestyle, satisfaction with communication, importance of information, satisfaction with information received, problems experienced, and assistance received for problems. FINDINGS: Significant differences related to a number of factors were found between the men with recurrent prostate cancer and those without recurrent disease. A large number of those with recurrent disease experienced problems with side effects, anger, and pain and received help for their pain; experienced a negative impact on leisure time and on mental health; experienced difficulty talking with healthcare professionals; and felt the need to talk with someone about their cancer. Many of the men with recurrent disease were dissatisfied with the information they received about their medical condition and possible side effects. CONCLUSIONS: Men with prostate cancer experience both physical and psychosocial difficulties. Many perceive that they are not receiving adequate help for these difficulties. Future research is needed to increase understanding of how men are managing the impact of prostate cancer and what types of interventions would be most useful. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE: Findings emphasize the need for nurses to be certain that they are conducting broad-based assessments of patients with prostate cancer throughout the illness experience. Nurses need to inform patients about services available to assist them, help patients understand the emotional responses to illness, and provide opportunities for patients to talk about the illness and its impact.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations53
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207