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 OpenAlex
Shalini S. Nayak, Krishna Sharan, Jyothi Chakrabarty, Elsa Devi, Nagaraja Ravishankar, Anice George

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.481
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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