CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 6Cancer survivorship and carePain Management and Opioid UseHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 16 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Artificial Neural Network Modeling of Quality of Life of Cancer Patients: Relationships between Quality of Life Assessments, as Evaluated by Patients, Pharmacists, and Nurses

Open access
Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Josai International University, Gumyo 1, Togane, Chiba, Japan, Yamamura, Shigeo, Takehira, Rieko, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Josai International University, Gumyo 1, Togane, Chiba, Japan, Murakami, Keiko, Katayama, Sirou, Department of Pharmacy, Nippon Medical University Hospital, Sendagi 1-1-5, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan, Nishizawa, Kenji, Department of Pharmacy, Omori Medical Center, Toho University, 6-11-1 Omori-Nishi, Ota-ku, Tokyo, Japan·2011·International Journal of Biomedical Science
DOI 10.59566/ijbs.2011.7255PMC PMC3614841
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

AIM: The purpose of this study was to investigate the difference between the professional perspectives of pharmacists and nurses in Japan with regard to evaluation of the quality of life (QOL) of cancer patients. METHODS: A group of cancer hospital inpatients (n=15) were asked to rate the condition of their health and their QOL by filling in a questionnaire. On the same day, a group of pharmacists (n=8) and nurses (n=18) also evaluated patient QOL. Three-layered artificial neural network (ANN) architecture was used to model the relationship between the different QOL evaluations made by patients, pharmacists, and nurses. RESULTS: Although there was no statistical difference between the QOL scores obtained from pharmacists and nurses, the correlation between these scores was weak (0.1188). These results suggest that pharmacists and nurses evaluate the QOL of their patients from different perspectives, based on their respective profession. QOL parameters were modeled with an ANN using the scores, given by patients in answer to questions regarding health-related QOL as input variables. Both the predictive performance of the ANN and the robustness of the optimized model were acceptable. The response surfaces calculated by ANN modeling showed that pharmacists and nurses evaluate patient's QOL using different information and reasoning, which is likely related to the nature of their contact with the patients. CONCLUSION: Health professionals evaluate patient QOL from different perspectives, depending on their profession.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.59566/ijbs.2011.7255

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In three studies (15%), nurses were passively involved by being a secondary source of patient or other cancer data used for analysis by AI algorithms.

    “In three studies (15%), nurses were passively involved by being a secondary source of patient or other cancer data used for analysis by AI algorithms (Chung et al., 2021;Soltani et al., 2022;Takehira et al., 2011).”

    From The application and use of artificial intelligence in cancer nursing: A systematic review (2024) · cites this paper as Takehira et al., 2011

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. [1]World Health Organization: Cancer Pain Relief: With a Guide to Opioid Availability 1996 Second edition World Health Organization
  2. [15]Shepherd AJ Second-order methods for neural networks 1997 New York Springer
  3. [19]Petersen MA Larsen H Pedersen L Sonne N Assessing health-related quality of life in palliative care: Comparing patient and physician assessments Eur. J. Cancer 2006 42 1159 1166 16624553
  4. [20]Dybowski R Gant V Dybowski R Gant V Clinical Application of Artificial Neural Networks 2001 Cambridge Cambridge University Press 1 27
  5. [21]Gregory D Johnston R Pratt G Quality of Life. Dictionary of Human Geography 2009 5th Oxford Wiley-Blackwell

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, J. I. U., Yamamura, S., Takehira, R., Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, J. I. U., Murakami, K., Katayama, S., Department of Pharmacy, N. M. U. H., Nishizawa, K., & Department of Pharmacy, O. M. C.
ORCID
Venue
International Journal of Biomedical Science
Publisher
International Association of Biomedical Sciences
Published
2011-12-15
Volume
7
Issue
4
Pages
255-262
ISSN
  • 1550-9702 (ISSN-L)
  • 1555-2810
DOI
10.59566/ijbs.2011.7255
PMC
PMC3614841
OpenAlex
W4386941389
Cited by
6
References
16
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
0.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • International Journal of Biomedical Science (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Opioid Use
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Keywords
quality of life, cancer patients, health professionals' perspectives, pharmacists, nurses, patient-reported quality of life, interprofessional agreement, neural network model, health-related quality of life

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review