MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117576739 · doi:10.1001/jama.2025.23403

A Lay Health Worker–Led Symptom Intervention and Acute Care Use in Older Adults With Cancer

2025· article· en· W7117576739 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Manali I. Patel, Mila Voskanyan, Hilda H. Agajanian, Richy Agajanian, Yale D. Podnos, Arnold Milstein

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCancerIntervention (counseling)Acute careHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: Undertreated cancer symptoms are common among older adults, yet effective early identification and intervention remain limited. Objective: To determine whether lay health worker-led symptom assessment reduces acute care use among older adults with cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: Multisite randomized clinical trial across 43 oncology clinics in California and Arizona conducted from November 2020 through October 2023 with 12 months of follow-up among Medicare Advantage beneficiaries aged 75 years or older with newly diagnosed, recurrent, or progressive cancer. Interventions: Participants were randomized 1:1 into a symptom assessment group (n = 200; usual care with lay health worker-led, telephone-based symptom assessments for 12 months using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System) or a control group (n = 216; usual care alone), with planned enrollment of 200 in both groups. The lay health workers reviewed assessments with advanced practice practitioners who conducted interventions for symptoms rated 4 or greater or that increased by 2 points or more. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes were determined a priori. The primary outcome was emergency department (ED) use and hospitalizations. Secondary outcomes were total costs, hospice, and, among decedents, acute care within 30 days of death and facility deaths. Results: Among 416 patients, the median age was 82 (range, 75-99) years; 219 (52.6%) were male; 171 (41.1%) had stage 4 disease; and 27 (6.4%) had recurrent disease. The mean risk adjustment factor score was 2.70 (SD, 1.77). Symptom assessment participants had 53% lower odds of ED use (61 [30.5%] vs 103 [47.7%] had ≥1 ED visit; adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.47; 95% CI, 0.32-0.71), 68% lower odds of hospitalization (37 [18.5%] vs 86 [39.8%] had ≥1 hospitalization; OR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.20-0.51), and lower mean total costs by $12 000 per participant (P = .01) than control group participants. Among 142 deceased participants (71 in each group), symptom assessment participants had 68% lower odds of ED use within 30 days of death (OR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.12-0.88) and 75% lower odds of acute care facility death (OR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.08-0.77). Conclusions and Relevance: A lay health worker-led symptom assessment intervention may be a scalable approach to reduce acute care use. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04463992.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.296 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMASame topicFrailty in Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207