MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283691055 · doi:10.31557/apjcp.2022.23.6.1827

Psychosocial Distress of Head Neck Cancer (HNC) Patients Receiving Radiotherapy: A Systematic Review

2022· review· en· W4283691055 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shalini S. Nayak, Krishna Sharan, Jyothi Chakrabarty, Elsa Devi, Nagaraja Ravishankar, Anice George

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychosocialHead and neck cancerDistressRadiation therapyMedicineHead and neckPsychological distressOncologyInternal medicineClinical psychologyPsychiatrySurgeryMental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Head and Neck Cancer (HNC) patients are at increased risk of psychosocial distress compared with patients with other forms of cancer. Various symptoms of the disease and side effects of treatment are attributing factors for distress. This systematic review aimed to identify the prevalence of psychosocial distress among HNC patients receiving radiotherapy. METHODS: The following search engines from 2000-2021 were searched: PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane, Web of Science, ProQuest, Scopus, and Embase. Citation checking and extensive reference checking were also conducted. Cross-sectional, longitudinal, cohort, exploratory and prospective, repeated measure studies published in English were included. Newcastle Ottawa Scale assessed the quality, and the data were extracted on a validated data extraction form. RESULTS: Out of 782 articles, eleven records met the eligibility criteria, including 776 HNC patients receiving radiotherapy. Data were synthesized and summarized descriptively as measurements were not homogenous. Prevalence estimates of depression or depressive symptoms were calculated. Outcomes were measured with various measuring tools and reported in frequency, percentage, mean, and standard deviation in various studies. All studies reported depression ranging from 9.8% to 83.8%, and pooled estimated prevalence of depression among HNC patients receiving radiotherapy is 63% (95% CI 42-83) with significant heterogeneity (I2= 97.66%; p<0.001). An increase in the trend is observed along with treatment progression. Another three studies reported anxiety along with depression. Physical symptoms, body image, low social support, fatigue specific radiotherapy regimens were the predictive factors of depression. CONCLUSION: HNC patients are psychosocially distressed during radiotherapy, and the distress is steadily increased during the therapy. The predictive factors could serve as potential areas of intervention and supportive therapy during radiotherapy.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.006
Bibliometrics0.0060.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.347 · 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 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

Citations36
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Pacific Journal of Cancer PreventionSame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207