MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383646855 · doi:10.37939/jrmc.v27i1.2037

Emotional Distress Among Pediatric Cancer Patients and their Siblings

2023· article· en· W4383646855 on OpenAlexaff
Ruqayya Manzoor, Nuzhat Yasmeen, Hijab Shaheen, Nazia Mushtaq

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Rawalpindi Medical College · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsPediatric Oncology Group
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmotional distressMedicineDistressPediatric cancerAnxietyClinical psychologyMental healthChildhood cancerPsychiatryCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: Cancer being a serious chronic illness, causes profound effects on physical and mental health of the individual as well as affects their caregivers and family members' mental health. This study aims to find out the burden of emotional distress in patients of childhood cancer as well as their healthy siblings. Methods: It was a descriptive cross-sectional study. Parents of the children undergoing cancer treatment or having completed treatment within past one year were asked to complete an interview proforma (Pediatric Emotional Distress Scale) about their child’s behaviour over past one month, scoring each behaviour on a scale of 1 to 5 according to the frequency of symptoms. The data was then analysed using SPSS 20. The frequency distribution, central tendencies and standard deviations were calculated accordingly. Results: Almost eighty-five% of the patients showed scores above the clinical threshold for emotional distress. Eighteen% of the healthy siblings also had scores above the clinical threshold. Patients as well as their healthy siblings showed high levels of anxiousness in their behaviours. Conclusions Childhood cancer is a cause of major emotional trauma in patients. Age-matched siblings usually cope well with the illness.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Rawalpindi Medical CollegeSame topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207