Determining the unmet needs of outpatients with lung cancer and the relationship between unmet needs and quality of life.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: To identify the m e t needs of outpatients diagnosed with lung cancer and to determine the relationship between m e t needs and quality of life.Methods: Consecutive outpatients with lung cancer at the Tom Baker Cancer Centre were approached to participate in this survey.Participation consisted of the completion of a needs questionnaire and quality of life questionnaires.Results: Highest needs were identified in the health information, physical and daily living, and psychological domains.The majority of patients reported some need in each domain.No differences were noted by clinic attended, sex, age, place of residence.or disease severity.A weak to moderate relationship was found behveen the domains of unmet need and the dimensions of quality of life.The results are generalizable to the Alberta lung cancer population. Conclusion:This study identified unmet needs of lung cancer patients which.with future study, may eventually improve patients' experiences with their illness.Thank you to the following people:The patients of the Tom Baker Cancer Centre Outpatient Clinic -You told me stories that touched my heart.Thank you for sharing your time and experiences with me.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".