Longitudinal Follow-Up of the Psychological Well-Being of Patients with Colorectal Cancer: Final Analysis of PICO-SM
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PICO-SM was a prospective longitudinal study investigating the psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients with colorectal cancer treated in a large UK tertiary cancer centre. Here, we present the impact of the third wave of the pandemic (December 2021 to February 2022), when the Omicron variant became prevalent in the UK, and the complete longitudinal comparison across the entire duration of this study. Patients were invited to complete a questionnaire, including screening psychometric tools. In total, n = 312 patients were included in the final analysis. Specifically, in this Omicron-predominant wave, n = 96 patients were studied in detail: the mean age was 64 years, 64% were male, 33% reported poor well-being, 27% anxiety, 11% depressive symptoms, and 3% trauma-related symptoms. The participants who had investigations cancelled (OR 9.22, 95% CI 1.09–77.85; p = 0.041) or felt that the pandemic would affect their mental health (OR 3.82, 95% CI 1.96–7.44; p < 0.001) had an increased risk of anxiety according to a multivariate analysis. Similarly, independent predictors of poor well-being included concern that the pandemic would affect their cancer treatment (OR 4.59, 95% CI 1.03–20.56; p = 0.046) or mental health (OR 3.90, 95% CI 1.38–11.03; p = 0.010). The psychological distress experienced by patients, particularly anxiety, remained high during the third wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. These results align with our previously reported findings, emphasising the importance of continuing cancer treatment amidst an ongoing humanitarian emergency.
Stored with the screening record, where it is evidence for the labels above.
How this classification was reachedexpand
The three-model screen
all 5,600 screened works →All three models called this out of scope.
Longitudinal study of psychological well-being in colorectal cancer patients; a clinical question.
This longitudinal study examines psychological well-being among cancer patients rather than research practice.
Longitudinal clinical study of psychological well-being in colorectal cancer patients during COVID-19.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".