MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403646342 · doi:10.3390/curroncol31100479

Assessing the Impact of the Prostate Cancer Patient Empowerment Program (PC-PEP) on Relationship Satisfaction, Quality of Life, and Support Group Participation: A Randomized Clinical Trial

2024· article· en· W4403646342 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Cory Burgher, G. Ilie, Ross Mason, Ricardo Rendon, Andrea Kokorovic, Greg Bailly, Nikhilesh Patil, David Bowes, Derek Wilke, Cody MacDonald, Markos Tsirigotis, Calvin Butler, David Bell, Jesse Spooner, Robert David Harold Rutledge

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersResearch Nova ScotiaDalhousie UniversityDalhousie Medical Research Foundation
KeywordsMedicineAttendanceProstate cancerQuality of life (healthcare)EmpowermentRandomized controlled trialClinical trialIntervention (counseling)Mental healthCancerExploratory researchFamily medicineGerontologyOncologyNursingInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background/Objectives: The Prostate Cancer Patient Empowerment Program (PC-PEP) is a 6-month, home-based intervention aimed at enhancing mental health in men undergoing curative prostate cancer treatment. This exploratory secondary analysis evaluates PC-PEP’s impact on relationship satisfaction, quality of life, and support group attendance among partnered participants. Methods: In a crossover randomized clinical trial ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03660085) of 128 men aged 50–82 scheduled for curative prostate cancer surgery or radiotherapy, 119 participants in relationships were included. Of these, 59 received the 6-month PC-PEP intervention, while 60 were randomized to a waitlist-control arm, receiving standard care for 6 months before starting PC-PEP. The intervention included daily emails with video instructions on mental and physical health, diet, social support, fitness, stress reduction, and intimacy. Outcomes were assessed using the Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS) and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Prostate (FACT-P). Results: While relationship satisfaction remained stable, a significant improvement in emotional well-being was observed at 12 months in participants undergoing radiation therapy (p = 0.045). The PC-PEP intervention also led to significantly higher support group attendance at both 6 months (p = 0.001) and 12 months (p = 0.003), emphasizing its role in fostering social support and community engagement. Conclusions: The PC-PEP program effectively maintains relationship satisfaction and enhances emotional well-being, particularly in patients with fewer physical side effects. Its design promotes comprehensive care by integrating physical, psychological, and social support, making it a valuable resource for improving the quality of life in prostate cancer patients and potentially applicable to other cancer types.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.272
GPT teacher head0.633
Teacher spread0.360 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent OncologySame topicAttachment and Relationship DynamicsFrench-language works237,207