QLTI-14. PEDIATRIC CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM TUMOR SURVIVOR AND CAREGIVER EXPERIENCES WITH MULTIDISCIPLINARY TELEMEDICINE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Central nervous system (CNS) tumors are the second most common pediatric cancer; survivors develop chronic medical conditions and complex care needs. While telemedicine is accelerating, its effectiveness has not been assessed in pediatric CNS tumor survivors. We evaluated the experiences of those seen through our Pediatric Neuro-Oncology Survivorship Clinic at Dana-Farber/ Boston Children’s Cancer and Blood Disorder Center. Patients and caregivers who had a multi-disciplinary telemedicine survivorship appointment from January 2021 through March 2022 were invited to participate in an anonymous survey which included questions on demographics, travel, equipment, experiences with telehealth, and preferences for telehealth utilization. Thirty-three adult survivors and 41 caregivers participated in the study (45% response rate). The majority of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that telemedicine visits started on time (97%, Nf65), scheduling was convenient (97%, Nf59), clinicians explained things in an easy-to-understand way (97%, Nf59), listened carefully and addressed concerns (93%, Nf56), and spent enough time with them (95%, Nf56). However, only 58% (Nf35) of respondents agreed or strongly agreed they would like to continue with telemedicine and only 48% (Nf32) agreed telemedicine was as effective as office visits. In our univariable analysis, the majority of respondents reported telemedicine as better with regards to travel time (82%, Nf60), convenience (68%, Nf50), wait time (70%, Nf50), and ease of scheduling (56%, Nf40), while the majority reported office visits as better with regards to personal connection (58%, Nf41). Survivors were more likely than caregivers to prefer office visits for personal connection (72% vs 46%, p=0.027). The most common telemedicine difficulties were using the system (15%, Nf11) and asking questions they would normally ask in clinic (19%, Nf14). While multi-disciplinary telehealth may improve care efficiency and accessibility for pediatric CNS tumor survivors, initiatives to improve personal connection are necessary to optimize patient satisfaction.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".