MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390758415 · doi:10.2196/54707

Supporting Life Adjustment in Patients With Lung Cancer Through a Comprehensive Care Program: Protocol for a Controlled Before-and-After Trial

2024· article· en· W4390758415 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Wonyoung Jung, Alice Ahn, Genehee Lee, Sunga Kong, Danbee Kang, Dongok Lee, Tae Eun Kim, Young Mog Shim, Hong Kwan Kim, Jong Ho Cho, Juhee Cho, Dong Wook Shin

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Science and ICT, South KoreaNational Research Foundation of KoreaNational Research Foundation
KeywordsMedicinePrehabilitationSurvivorship curveIntervention (counseling)Quality of life (healthcare)Physical therapyLung cancerRandomized controlled trialCancerFamily medicineNursingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer diagnosis affects an individual's quality of life as well as physical and emotional functioning. Information on survivorship care tends to be introduced at the end of treatment, but early intervention may affect posttreatment adjustment. However, to the best of our knowledge, no study has explored the effect of early information intervention on the return to work, family, and societal roles of lung cancer survivors. OBJECTIVE: We report the study protocol of a comprehensive care prehabilitation intervention designed to facilitate lung cancer survivors' psychological adjustment after treatment. METHODS: A comprehensive care program was developed based on a literature review and a qualitative study of patients with lung cancer and health professionals. The Lung Cancer Comprehensive Care Program consists of educational videos and follow-up visits by a family medicine physician. To prevent contamination, the control group received routine education, whereas the intervention group received routine care and intervention. Both groups completed questionnaires before surgery (T0) and at 1-month (T1), 6-month (T2), and 1-year (T3) follow-up visits after surgery. The primary outcome was survivors' psychological adjustment to cancer 6 months after pulmonary resection. RESULTS: The historical control group (n=441) was recruited from September 8, 2021, to April 20, 2022, and the intervention group (n=350) was recruited from April 22, 2022, to October 17, 2022. All statistical analyses will be performed upon completion of the study. CONCLUSIONS: This study examined the effectiveness of an intervention that provided general and tailored informational support to lung cancer survivors, ranging from before to the end of treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05078918; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05078918. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/54707.

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)0.031
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.174

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0310.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0070.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.005
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0080.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0520.009

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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.554
Teacher spread0.449 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicCancer survivorship and care→French-language works237,207→