PO66 ASSESSING SELECT EMOTIONAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL STATES OF STAGE IV BREAST CANCER PATIENTS: A CANADIAN BREAST CANCER NETWORK (CBCN) ASSESSMENT PROJECT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
diagnosed with LABC during the first oncological consultation.The questionnaire consisting of socio-demographic and clinical variables, the Mental Adjustment to Cancer Scale (Mini MAC) and the Brief Religious Coping scale (Brief RCOPE).Data collection was done by EpiInfo software and statistical analysis by SPSS software.A multivariate linear model was used to find the determinants associated with different psychological adjustment strategies.Results: In total, our study population was composed of 209 women with an average age of 47.4 ± 9.4 years.Among our main results, we found that the fatalism strategy had the highest average, followed by the fighting spirit as a coping strategy.Multivariate linear analysis showed that fighting spirit was associated with occupation and Negative Religious Coping (NRC).While, the determinants of fatalism strategy were monthly family income and NRC.Conclusion: A program to strengthen adaptive strategies is necessary from the diagnosis of the disease and also during the different stages of treatment.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".