MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Pain severity among Black and White patients with cancer within a remote symptom monitoring program using electronic patient-reported outcomes.

2024· article· en· W4402986706 on OpenAlexaff
Joud El Dick, Sandra C. Olisakwe, Luqin Deng, Jeffrey Franks, Nicole E. Caston, Courtney Williams, Andrés Azuero, Chelsea McGowen, Bryanna Diaz, Carrie C. McNair, Sheila McElhany, D’Ambra Dent, Noon Eltoum, I. Starks, Katherine Parks, Doris Howell, Angela M. Stover, Ethan Basch, Jennifer Young Pierce, Gabrielle B. Rocque

Bibliographic record

VenueJCO Oncology Practice · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWhite (mutation)CancerPhysical therapyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

138 Background: Black patients with cancer report higher pain intensity for both consistent and breakthrough pain. Remote symptom monitoring (RSM) using electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) allows patients with cancer to communicate symptoms between visits. This study evaluated whether there were racial disparities in pain severity reporting among Black and White patients with cancer utilizing RSM with ePROs. Methods: This retrospective study analyzed data from 1453 patients with cancer undergoing treatment who utilized an RSM platform for the completion of weekly PRO-CTCAEs surveys to report pain intensity. Survey data from patients during the initial 6 months following RSM enrollment at the University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB) and the Mitchell Cancer Institute (MCI) were included. Descriptive statistics were compared using frequencies, percentages, and Cramer’s V for categorical variables. Regression models were adjusted for age, sex, cancer type, and rurality. Results: Data from 1453 patients and 17,722 surveys were analyzed. 454 (31.2%) patients were Black and 999 (68.8%) patients were White. Among 454 baseline surveys completed by Black patients, no pain was reported in 68%, mild pain in 4%, moderate in 12%, and severe in 16%. In comparison, among 999 baseline surveys completed by White patients, no pain was reported in 71%, mild pain in 3%, moderate in 12% and severe in 14% (V=0.03). Among all post-baseline surveys completed by Black patients, no pain was reported in 69% (n=5081), mild pain in 5%, moderate in 13% and severe in 13%. In comparison, among all post-baseline surveys completed by White patients, no pain was reported in 72% (n=11188), mild pain in 4%, moderate in 14% and severe in 10% (V=0.05). In adjusted analysis, severe pain at follow-up was higher amongst Black patients than White patients (OR 1.17; 95% CI 0.87-1.56). Conclusions: Although modestly increased prevalence (3%) in any pain at baseline and severe pain during their 6 months after enrollment in RSM was observed for Black participants compared to Whites, this finding was not significant in adjusted models. This analysis suggests similar pain levels for Black and White patients within RSM programs. RSM can promote proactive reporting and early intervention for pain, which may help to mitigate previously reported disparities in long-term pain for Black individuals.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.112
Threshold uncertainty score0.903

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.329 · 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 teacher head, 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 venueJCO Oncology PracticeSame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207