Providing audiotapes of primary adjuvant treatment consultations to men with prostate cancer: Impact on recall, mood, satisfaction, and quality of life
Bibliographic record
Abstract
8009 Background: Previously we reported on the benefits of providing audiotapes of primary adjuvant treatment consultations to women with newly diagnosed breast cancer (Hack et al; Proc ASCO 2001). The purpose of this multi-site, randomized controlled trial was to use similar methods to examine the efficacy of providing men with prostate cancer with an audiotape of their primary adjuvant treatment consultation. Methods: A total of 429 men and 15 oncologists from cancer centres in three Canadian cities participated. The men were block randomized to 1 of 4 consultation groups: 1. Standard Care Control Group - Consultation not audiotaped (n=113); 2. Patient not given audiotape (n=98); 3. Patient given audiotape (n=120); and 4. Patient offered choice of receiving the audiotape (n=94 accepted tape, n=4 declined tape). Patients completed the Decisional Role Preferences Scale (Degner) before and after the consultation, a measure of communication satisfaction post-consultation, and measures of decisional role, audiotape use, information recall, communication satisfaction, mood disturbance (Profile of Mood States), and prostate cancer-specific quality of life (FACT-P) at 3 months post-consultation. A feedback questionnaire was mailed to all participating oncologists. Results: Analyses of covariance showed that patients who received the consultation audiotape reported having had significantly more discussion about treatment side effects (p<.01), treatment alternatives (p<.05), and treatment and disease information in general (p<.05) than patients who did not receive the audiotape. Patients rated the audiotape intervention positively, with an average score of 83.0 out of 100. Fifty-six percent of oncologists stated that most, if not all, patients should be provided with an audiotape of their primary adjuvant treatment consultations. Conclusions: Audiotapes of primary adjuvant treatment consultations are rated beneficial by prostate cancer patients and their oncologists, and aid patients by facilitating perception of being informed of treatment alternatives and treatment side effects. No significant financial relationships to disclose.
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 | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".