Anxiety and depression among participants in an early ovarian cancer diagnosis program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Despite its low incidence, ovarian cancer is associated with very poor prognosis and this is common knowledge in the general population. There is limited knowledge about the levels of anxiety and depression in women who undergo diagnostic testing for suspected ovarian cancer. The setting of this study was the DOvE (Diagnosing Ovarian cancer Early) project, an ongoing study providing cancer antigen (CA125) testing and trans-vaginal ultrasound (TVUS) at dedicated diagnostic centres in Montreal for women with symptoms that have been found to be associated with ovarian cancer. Objectives: Our aim was to examine whether taking part in this program had an impact on depression and anxiety from baseline; in particular, we wanted to assess whether a false positive test had a persistent effect, defined as lasting 4 months or more, after women had been informed that the test was negative. Methods: 706 symptomatic women, 50 years or older, who took part in DOvE between July 2010 and September 2012, completed psychological questionnaires, the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) and the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) at two key points in the diagnostic process: at the clinic immediately before evaluation, and at follow-up (FU) visit, 4 months later. Results: While anxiety rates and scores were similar at initial assessment and follow-up visit, we saw a decrease in depression rates and scores over time (p<.001). There were no significant differences on demographic variables and anxiety/depression scores between the patients testing positive in the absence of disease (false positives) and those with negative results correctly diagnosed (true negatives). Women who had true negative results (77%) had a significantly lower score for depression at FU than at the beginning of the program (p<.001). Conclusions: Overall, taking part in DOvE did not appear to negatively affect women's medium term anxiety and depression scores. Moreover, participants appeared to benefit from the reassurance provided by negative result, which is of relevance in the context of a low incidence disease with a reputation for poor outcome.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".