Assessment of urine colour using a wallet card: a randomised study of a novel patient self-care tool during chemoradiation for oesophageal cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiation for oesophageal cancer often experience dehydration from decreased fluid intake and increased losses. Despite frequent clinical visits during treatment, patients can still present with dehydration, suggesting the need for increased patient awareness and engagement around adverse event management at home. Evidence for benefits of self-monitoring may help motivate patients to engage proactively in their own care to improve their treatment experience. METHODS: We performed a randomised single-centre study of a urine colour self-monitoring card (UCC) during chemoradiation therapy for oesophageal cancer, compared with standard dietitian counselling. Primary outcome was self-efficacy as determined by the Self-Management Resource Centre Self-Efficacy for Managing Chronic Disease Scale (SMCD). Secondary outcomes included Burge thirst scores, Edmonton Symptom Assessment System scores (ESAS), patient-initiated hydrations, creatinine rise and satisfaction with the UCC. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients were randomised. UCC use was not associated with improved SMCD or ESAS scores compared with standard counselling. The card was highly rated by patients as a welcome tool for self-monitoring. CONCLUSIONS: No beneficial effect on self-efficacy or dehydration markers with UCC use was demonstrated. The study nonetheless drew attention to several factors potentially hindering its use for effective self-care: the unexpected severity of other symptoms consuming patients' attention, reduced sensitivity of urine colour due to chemotherapy, absence of active inquiry by the healthcare team and the inconvenient location of the UCC in wallet/purse. Urine colour monitoring in patients with oesophageal cancer to improve the patient experience during treatment warrants further study but supported by active healthcare provider inquiry, more accessible format of the card, and possibly home vital checks to increase its sensitivity in the clinical context.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".