MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400453382 · doi:10.1136/bmjebm-2024-sdc.300

301 ‘All about the value?’: decisional needs of breast reconstruction for breast cancer patients in the chinese context: a mixed-methods study

2024· article· en· W4400453382 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Meiqi Meng, Xuejing Li, Xiangdi Liu, Dan Yang, Yufang Hao

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical practice guidelines implementation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Breast cancerValue (mathematics)Computer scienceBreast reconstructionMedicineOncologyCancerInternal medicineHistoryMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Understanding the breast cancer (BC) patient‘s decisional needs is critical in helping health care professionals (HCPs) provide support to conduct shared decision-making (SDM) and help women make informed breast reconstruction (BR) decisions that are suitable for their clinical and personal circumstances. Therefore, this study aims to explore BC patients‘ participation in BR decision-making and specific decisional needs, especially the manifestations and causes of decisional conflicts, in China. Methods A mixed-methods study was conducted using triangulation of data from interviews and a questionnaire survey with HCPs and BC patients with BR decision-making experience at 5 Beijing centers. The Ottawa Decision Support Framework guided (ODSF) the qualitative and quantitative data analyses. Results A total of 82.53% of Chinese BC patients would consider BR. Seven themes captured patients‘ BR decisional needs per the ODSF: inadequate support/resources (100%, 58.82%) and knowledge (75%, 52.94%) were most frequently cited. Health beliefs (unclear values) reflected Chinese characteristics. Patients had inadequate knowledge (M=19.99/50, SD=8.67) but positive BR attitudes (M=59.48/95, SD=10.45). Discussion Chinese BC patients show positive attitudes but have lower actual involvement in decision-making. Cultural influences, such as patriarchal norms and Confucianism, shape decision- making. BR decisions for Chinese BC patients are complex and often accompanied by decisional conflicts. Inadequate knowledge and inadequate support and resources contribute to these conflicts, emphasizing the need for culturally tailored information and support to promote SDM. Conclusion HCPs need specialized training in SDM to guide patients in decision-making. It is essential to provide relevant resources and support that are culturally and clinically appropriate for Chinese patients.

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)0.009
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.525
Teacher spread0.424 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicClinical practice guidelines implementationFrench-language works237,207