MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7005110956

Patient-reported symptoms in daily oncology practice

2024· dissertation· en· W7005110956 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUtrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) · 2024
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicDiverse Scientific and Economic Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiseasePopulationQuality of life (healthcare)DistressingLimitingContext (archaeology)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The number of patients diagnosed with cancer increases. At the same time cancer patients live longer due to earlier diagnosis and more effective therapies. During the course of their disease, patients experience many disease and/or treatmentrelated symptoms that impact health-related quality of life and daily functioning. Symptoms and their impact can be overlooked and/or underestimated by healthcare professionals. If symptoms remain under-recognized, physical, mental, existential and social functioning is affected and opportunities for diagnosis and management of symptoms may be missed. Patient-reported outcome measurement tools (PROMs) can be used to assess and monitor symptoms and symptom burden. The Utrecht Symptom Diary is a Dutch translation and modified version of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) which is a worldwide frequently used and validated PROM in cancer patients. In 2003, the USD was developed for daily assessment and monitoring of symptoms of cancer and/or treatment-related physical and mental symptoms. It contains a total of 12 items – lack of appetite, nausea, abnormal stool, dysphagia, dry mouth, pain, sleeping problems, shortness of breath, fatigue, anxiety, depressed mood and overall well-being. Symptoms are scored on a zero-to-ten numeric rating scale (NRS), with higher values indicating increasing intensity. Moreover, patients are invited to add symptoms they experience and are not listed on the USD and are asked to prioritize symptoms which need attention in the patient-doctor-nurse conversation first from their personal perspective. Since 2007 treatment and disease specific modules of the USD have been developed. From 2015 the USD became part of the hospital electronic medical files. Over the last years the USD has been implemented in daily practice in other departments of the UMC Utrecht as well as in other (university)hospitals, general practices and hospices in the Netherlands. Moreover, use of the USD is recommended by the Netherlands Quality Framework for Palliative Care. This thesis describes the validation of the USD and patient-reported symptoms through the use of the USD in different patient groups and settings. The studies described in this thesis show the validity of the USD on content, criterion and construct level. In collaboration with the patient, the use of the USD gave insight into symptoms and their impact on quality of life. This insight is essential to provide personalized, supportive care during treatment with targeted therapies and immunotherapy in daily oncology practice.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.339
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.004

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.184 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUtrecht University Repository (Utrecht University)Same topicDiverse Scientific and Economic StudiesFrench-language works237,207