Perspectives sur l’accès et la qualité des services psychosociaux en cancer du sein : une étude qualitative sur l’expérience avant et durant la pandémie de la COVID-19
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background The experience of breast cancer diagnosis leads to being confronted with the unknown and uncertainty. In some cases, patients develop symptoms of psychological distress after the diagnosis, which can have a negative influence during and after treatment. In Quebec, there are several breast cancer clinics that appear to offer psychological assessment to patients and psychosocial services during the different phases of the disease. To our knowledge, few Quebec studies have looked at the effectiveness of and access to psychosocial services in times of non-crisis. The COVID-19 pandemic also led to changes in breast clinics (e.g., closure of screening clinics, reception of diagnosis remotely, changes in treatment plans). However, no Canadian study has qualitatively examined patients' experiences of the impact of the pandemic on access and effectiveness of these services. Objectives The first objective of this qualitative study is to describe the perspectives of Quebec women who received a breast cancer diagnosis and/or treatment during the pandemic on the access to and effectiveness of psychosocial services. In addition, the second objective is to identify patient recommendations for improving the well-being of patients receiving psychosocial oncology services. Method As part of this larger project, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 18 Quebec patients (M = 47.05 years, SD = 9.07) diagnosed and/or treated for breast cancer before and during the pandemic. Descriptive analyses performed in MaxQDA allowed us to establish a thematic guide and narrative summaries. Results A minority of participants (n = 6) were offered psychosocial services at the time of their diagnosis. Although not all of them used the resources offered, they appreciated having them available. In contrast, 12 participants did not receive psychosocial resources, and more than half of these women were unsatisfied as they experienced intense psychological distress following diagnosis, which continued during treatment. Many women (n = 12) had to seek help on their own. Conclusion In order to improve the long-term experience of patients in times of crisis and non-crisis in Quebec, the results show that it could be beneficial to offer psychosocial services based on the needs of users, rather than solely on the severity of psychological symptoms.
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 | 0.015 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".