Factors associated with self-care in adults with cancer receiving oral anticancer agents: A sex-stratified Bayesian analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study aims to assess self-care (SC) levels in Italian cancer patients receiving Oral Anticancer Agents (OAAs) and to identify their predictors, stratified by sex. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional analysis involving 518 cancer patients treated with OAAs across five Italian oncology centres. Sociodemographic, clinical, and psychosocial data (e.g., self-care, self-efficacy, social support, depression, patient-centredness, mutuality) were collected using validated instruments. Bayesian t-tests and sex-specific regression models were performed. RESULTS: Among 518 cancer patients treated with OAAs, men had significantly higher SC management scores than women, while no significant sex differences were found in SC maintenance or monitoring. In men, self-efficacy, mutuality, and depressive state strongly predicted self-care domains. In women, self-efficacy and perception of centrality were key predictors. CONCLUSION: Self-efficacy plays a key role in promoting SC behaviour in cancer patients under OAA. However, relational and perceptual factors - such as centrality, mutuality and social support - play a complementary role, modulated by sex and stage of the SC process. Such evidence suggests the usefulness of personalized interventions that enhance the psycho-social dimension and sex differences in promoting SC.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".