MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401907406 · doi:10.3390/cancers16172984

Using mHealth Technology to Evaluate Daily Symptom Burden among Adult Survivors of Childhood Cancer: A Feasibility Study

2024· article· en· W4401907406 on OpenAlexaff
Kristen E. Howell, Jessica L. Baedke, Farideh Bagherzadeh, Aaron McDonald, Paul C. Nathan, Kirsten K. Ness, Melissa M. Hudson, Gregory T. Armstrong, Yutaka Yasui, I‐Chan Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueCancers · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsChildhood cancermHealthMedicineCancerGerontologyData sciencePsychiatryComputer scienceInternal medicinePsychological intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Cancer therapies predispose survivors to a high symptom burden. This study utilized mobile health (mHealth) technology to assess the feasibility of collecting daily symptoms from adult survivors of childhood cancer to evaluate symptom fluctuation and associations with future health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL). METHODS: This prospective study used an mHealth platform to distribute a 20-item cancer-related symptom survey (5 consecutive days each month) and an HRQOL survey (the day after the symptom survey) over 3 consecutive months to participants from the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study. These surveys comprised a PROMIS-29 Profile and Neuro-QOL assessed HRQOL. Daily symptom burden was calculated by summing the severity (mild, moderate, or severe) of 20 symptoms. Univariate linear mixed-effects models were used to analyze total, person-to-person, day-to-day, and month-to-month variability for the burden of 20 individual symptoms. Multivariable linear regression was used to analyze the association between daily symptom burden in the first month and HRQOL in the third month, adjusted for covariates. RESULTS: Out of the 60 survivors invited, 41 participated in this study (68% enrollment rate); 83% reported their symptoms ≥3 times and 95% reported HRQOL in each study week across 3 months. Variability of daily symptom burden differed from person-to-person (74%), day-to-day (18%), and month-to-month (8%). Higher first-month symptom burden was associated with poorer HRQOL related to anxiety (regression coefficient: 6.56; 95% CI: 4.10-9.02), depression (6.32; 95% CI: 3.18-9.47), fatigue (7.93; 95% CI: 5.11-10.80), sleep (6.07; 95% CI: 3.43-8.70), pain (5.16; 95% CI: 2.11-8.22), and cognitive function (-6.89; 95% CI: -10.00 to -3.79) in the third month. CONCLUSIONS: Daily assessment revealed fluctuations in symptomology, and higher symptom burden was associated with poorer HRQOL in the future. Utilizing mHealth technology for daily symptom assessment improves our understanding of symptom dynamics and sources of variability.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.352 · 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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancersSame topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207