MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4407063387 · doi:10.1038/s41598-024-84852-9

Exploring health related quality of life for women with breast cancer in Ireland and Québec, Canada throughout the COVID-19 pandemic

2025· article· en· W4407063387 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Charlotte Myers, Kathleen Bennett, Caitríona Cahir, Josée Savard, Sophie Lauzier

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 and healthcare impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersPfizer CanadaRoyal College of Surgeons in IrelandEli Lilly and CompanyUniversité LavalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de QuébecPfizer
KeywordsPandemicStressorPsychosocialMedicineQuality of life (healthcare)GerontologyDemographyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)CohortCohort studyDiseasePsychiatryInternal medicineInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The long-term consequences from the COVID-19 pandemic on breast cancer (BC) is highly unknown, however persisting unmet needs and psychosocial difficulties are likely. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the change in health-related quality of life (HR-QoL) from the pandemic to post-pandemic for women living with a diagnosis of BC and to assess the association between COVID-19 stressor impact and HR-QoL in Ireland and Québec, Canada. Women with a diagnosis of BC were initially enrolled in the cohort study. HR-QoL was assessed during the pandemic (2020-2021) and post-pandemic periods (2022). COVID-19 stressor impact was computed post-pandemic, and change in HR-QoL during and post-pandemic was compared between Ireland and Québec using independent t-tests. Multivariable analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used to evaluate the association between COVID-19 stressor impact and changes in HR-QoL, and compare it between Ireland and Québec. 405 participants were included from both settings (Ireland n = 267; Québec n = 138). The average HR-QoL improved from the COVID-19 pandemic to post-pandemic, and there were no differences between Ireland and Québec. Women with high COVID-19 stressor impact (18.9% of participants) had a significantly smaller improvement in their overall HR-QoL compared to those with low COVID-19 stressor impact, and this was evident in Ireland (p < 0.004) and Québec (p < 0.0001) but there were no significant differences between Ireland and Québec (interaction p-value > 0.05). Overall, HR-QoL for women with BC improved from pandemic to post-pandemic period. However, similarly in both settings, women who experienced higher levels of COVID-19-related stress had a slower recovery in HR-QoL. These results can guide decisions about health services and policies to adequately address the on-going effect of the pandemic and also prepare for future health crises.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.174

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.172
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicCOVID-19 and healthcare impacts→French-language works237,207→