MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

22 / FROM HEALTHY TO VULNERABLE: OLDER MEN’S EXPERIENCES WITH PROSTATE CANCER AND CANCER CARE

2018· preprint· en· W4212777653 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Birgit van Ee

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProstate cancerCancerMedicineGerontologyOncologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Advanced cancer patients(AdCa) experience physical, psychological, existential/spiritual distress and financial distress(FD) associated with the disease or treatment. Regular assessments of these issues in the outpatient-setting are limited. Methods: We reviewed 289 consults of AdCa evaluated by our Supportive Care Outpatient-Center between October-2012 and January-2013. We used Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale adding two items following the same scale(0 to 10) to evaluate: Spiritual Pain and FD, (ESAS-FS). We determined the frequency, intensity and correlates of self-reported FD (Distress/Suffering experienced secondary to financial issues) among these AdCa. Results: Mean age(range): 60.1 years(22-92). 53% were male. 189(65%) were White, 45(15%) African American, and 34(12%) were Hispanic. Type of cancer: head and neck 62(21%), gastrointestinal 57(20%), breast 40(14%), lung 32(11%), urological 32(11%), and others 45(16%). 187/289(65%) AdCa had FD: mean(95% Confidence-Interval) 4(3.5-4.4). AdCa with FD had worse Pain [mean(95%CI) 5.12(4.7, 5.6) vs. 4.3(3.6, 4.9)](p=0.028), depression [3.8(3.3, 4.2) vs. 1.5(1.1, 2.1), p<0.0001], anxiety [4.1(3.6, 4.6 vs. 1.6(1.1, 2.1), p<0.0001], Well-Being [5.2 (4.9, 5.6) vs. 4.3 (3.7, 4.9), p=0.006], and Spiritual Pain[2.4(2.0, 2.9) vs. 0.5(0, 1.0), p<0.0001]. FD correlated (Spearman) with Pain r=0.25, p<0.0001; Sleep r=0.29, p<0.0001; Depression r=0.41, p<0.0001; Anxiety r=0.45, p<0.0001; Drowsiness r=0.26, p<0.0001, Well-being r=0.25, p<0.0001; and Spiritual Pain r=0.44, p<0.0001. Logistic regression multivariate analysis showed association with Spiritual Pain[OR (95% Wald CI) 1.575(1.284-1.932), p<0.0001] and Anxiety [1.261 (1.083-1.488), p<0.0001].Conclusion: FD was reported in more than 65% of AdCa. It correlates with physical and psychological, and spiritual distress. The use of ESAS-FS allows identifying AdCa with FD evaluated in a Supportive Care Outpatient Clinic. More research is needed.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.360 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues→French-language works237,207→