MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4388725521 · doi:10.1370/afm.22.s1.5355

The care and service partnership for cancer patients and their families to iimprove patients and professionals’ experience

2023· article· en· W4388725521 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marie‐Pascale Pomey

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)PopulationDistressScale (ratio)General partnershipAnxietyHospital Anxiety and Depression ScalePsychologyHealth careNursingMedicineFamily medicinePsychiatryClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Context: The introduction of Accompanying Patients (APs) as full members of the clinical team is a social innovation. This program is the first to offer APs to complement the oncology service offering emotional, informational, educational and navigation support. Objective: To assess the effect of APs on patients and health professionals Study Design and Analysis: A multiple longitudinal case study using mixed methods. Setting: University of Montréal Health Centre (Montreal, Canada); University of Laval Health Centre (Québec, Canada); Integrated University health and social services Centre of the East of Montréal (Montreal, Canada);. Population studied: People with cancer undergoing treatment and health professionals working in the cancer wards Intervention/Instrument & Outcome Measures: People with cancer had at least one contact with an AP during their treatment. They were asked to complete questionnaires (the Communication and Attitudinal Self-efficacy scale; the The Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K6). Additional interviews were conducted with a sample of these patients. in addition, health professionals were interviewed about their perception of the contribution or limitations of the AP’s interventions. Results; The 3 institutions provided support to 989 patients; 540 of whom agreed to participate in the research project. These accompaniments were mainly carried out in the breast cancer trajectory (96%). Interviews with patients show that the intervention reduces anxiety, helps them prepare for medical appointments, be more proactive in making decisions and have a better experience of care and quality of life. It allows APs to make sense of their care journey and give back to the next. The results of the Communication and Attitudinal Self-efficacy scale for cancer show that 100% of the accompanied patients understand and participate in their care and 90% maintain a positive attitude. The Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K6) showed that supported patients had less psychological distress than cancer patients in general (10.7% versus 33.5%). For professionals, they have access to patients’ personal information that can be helpful in treating their patients, feedback on their practices and on organizational issues.

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)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0060.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 topicCancer survivorship and care→French-language works237,207→