Telehealth Geriatric Assessment and Supportive Care Intervention (GAIN-S) Program: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Older patients with cancer face challenges in accessing high-quality cancer care, especially in resource-limited settings. We assessed the impact of a telehealth-adapted Geriatric Assessment-Guided Intervention (GAIN-S) among older Brazilians with metastatic cancer. PATIENT AND METHODS: This randomized clinical trial enrolled adults aged ≥65 years with metastatic cancer between June 2022 and July 2023. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either usual care or GAIN-S. In the GAIN-S arm, a multidisciplinary team (MDT) developed an intervention plan based on impairments identified through geriatric assessment (GA). The plan included MDT discussions and targeted referrals to psychiatry, social services, nutrition, supportive care, and certified fitness training over a 3-month period. Assessments were conducted at baseline and at 3 months. The primary outcome was change in physical function, measured by instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) at 3 months. Secondary endpoints included changes in mood (assessed using the Geriatric Depression Scale [GDS]), quality of life (assessed using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General [FACT-G]), and prognostic understanding. T tests and linear mixed models were used to compare groups at each timepoint and to assess longitudinal change. RESULTS: A total of 80 patients were enrolled (40 per arm). Clinical characteristics were well balanced between arms. Most patients were female (55.8%), with a mean age of 74 years (range, 65-88). At 3 months, patients in the GAIN-S arm showed improvements in physical function (IADL, +1.8), mood (GDS, -2.7), quality of life (FACT-G, +13.2), and symptom burden (assessed using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System [ESAS], -14.6), all with P values <.001. Patients in the intervention group also demonstrated more accurate prognostic understanding (P<.01). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the efficacy of the telehealth-administered GAIN-S intervention in older adults with cancer in Brazil. These findings underscore the importance of tailoring GA-guided interventions for resource-limited settings.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
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".