MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

2022 Global patient survey: Reported experience of diagnosis, management, and burden of renal cell carcinomas.

2023· article· en· W4324136146 on OpenAlexaff
Rachel H. Giles, Deborah Maskens, Marconi Lorenzo, Robin Martinez, Karin Kastrati, Carlos Castro, Juan Carlos Julian Mauro, Robert Bick, Margie Hickey, Daniel Yick Chin Heng, James Larkin, Axel Bex, Eric Jonasch, Sara MacLennan, Michael A.S. Jewett

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Financial Impacts of Cancer
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of CalgaryKidney Foundation of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePsychosocialFamily medicineQuality of life (healthcare)Best practiceKidney cancerCancerRenal cell carcinomaNursingOncologyInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

653 Background: Kidney cancer (renal cell carcinoma, RCC) has shown a sustained increase in its global prevalence thereby presenting increasing burden to health systems, and most of all, to individual patients and their families. Little is known about the variations in the patient experience and best practices among countries. Although individual national surveys have been held, no conclusions could be drawn about country-level variation in patient experience or best practice. Here, we report on the 3rd biennial Global Patient Survey on the diagnosis, management, and burden of Renal Cell Carcinomas conducted by the International Kidney Coalition (IKCC) and involving its Affiliate Organisations worldwide in 15 languages. The aim of the survey was to improve collective understanding and to contribute toward the reduction of the burden of kidney cancer around the world. Methods: A 35-question survey on the diagnosis, management, and burden of RCC was designed by a multi-country steering committee of patient leaders to identify geographic variations in 6 key dimensions: patient education, experience and awareness, access to care and clinical trials, best practices, quality of life, and unmet psychosocial needs. EAU, ESMO, ASCO and NCCN Guidelines committees provided topics of interest to support evidence-based medicine (eg patient perspective on active surveillance, biopsies, etc) . The survey was distributed to patients with kidney cancer and their caregivers in 15 languages, through social media and IKCC’s 49 Affiliate Organizations and/or allied organizations who are not formal affiliates. It was completed online or in paper form between 26 September 2022 and 31 October 2022. At the time of this abstract submission, the survey was still open for completion. Results: We will present the top-line results of the 2022 survey for the very first time. Survey results will be analyzed using cross-tabulations by an independent third-party organization, and multi-variate analysis of predetermined variable will be performed. The full global report will be presented, as well as individual country reports where at least 100 responses were received. Conclusions: The IKCC and its global affiliates will be using the results to ensure that patients’ voices are heard. Actionable points will suggest future projects. Furthermore, individual countries can use their reports to advance their understanding of patient experiences and to drive improvements in care provision locally.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.149
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicEconomic and Financial Impacts of CancerFrench-language works237,207