MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4406661311 · doi:10.3390/curroncol32020058

Patient-Centered Care for Adolescents and Young Adults with an Uncertain or Poor Cancer Prognosis: A Secondary Analysis of What Is Needed According to Patients, Caregivers, and Healthcare Providers

2025· article· en· W4406661311 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Milou J. P. Reuvers, Vivian W. G. Burgers, Eveliene Manten‐Horst, K. E. Messelink, Elsbeth J. H. M. van der Laan, Winette T.A. van der Graaf, Olga Husson

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
KeywordsMedicineHealth careCancerFamily medicineNursingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Patient-centered care focuses on aligning healthcare with a person's values and preferences to support their health and life goals. This approach is especially crucial among adolescents and young adults (AYAs-with a primary cancer diagnosis between the ages of 18 and 39) facing an uncertain or poor cancer prognosis (UPCP), whose care needs differ from those undergoing curative treatment. This study aims to gain insights from AYAs with a UPCP, their informal caregivers, and healthcare professionals (HCPs) to define optimal patient-centered care and identify barriers to its implementation. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 46 AYAs, 39 informal caregivers, and 49 HCPs from various clinical backgrounds. Findings highlighted the need of AYAs for an equal relationship with HCPs and active involvement in decision-making, alongside tailored information addressing their unique challenges. Informal caregivers expressed the need for information to support patients while preferring a minimal focus on themselves. HCPs noted the necessity for specialized training to meet the specific needs of AYAs with a UPCP, reporting difficulties in providing tailored support due to the disease's uncertainties. This study's results can lead to improved healthcare for this population and enhance educational modules for HCPs, equipping them to better support AYAs facing a UPCP.

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)0.026
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.338 · 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Oncology→Same topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life→French-language works237,207→