Search

How is the natural language of feedback affected when instructors are White and learners are minorities? The present research addressed this question using a website called Feedback Forward through which White undergraduates provided extensive open-ended responses on a poorly written essay supposedly drafted by either a Black or a White fellow student. Results revealed a dissociation between the substance and style of feedback to the Black writer. The Black writer received selectively more overt praise for his or her writing and writing skills, and more encouragement to pursue a writing-related career, replicating past studies of the positive bias. However, this positively biased feedback was conveyed in a selectively more "lenient" style, marked by a simpler and less analytic vocabulary, more personal pronouns, more positive emotion words, and syntax that more closely mimicked that of the poorly written essay. Discomfort supplying feedback moderated these effects. Increased discomfort was associated with more substantive criticism to the White writer, and with a more lenient style to the Black writer. In sum, minority learners may be receiving open-ended feedback that is a perplexing blend of explicit praise conveyed in an implicitly diminishing manner. Additional results showed that manipulated self-image concerns produced positively biased copyedits to the Black writer, replicating Harber, Stafford, and Kennedy (2010). Direct queries from the fictive writer--in the form of rating-based questions--also favored the Black writer, whose essay, ability, and prospects were rated higher than those of the White writer. Educational Impact and Implications Statement: This research showed a marked dissociation between the content of White instructors' feedback to Black learners and the style in which this feedback is conveyed. Instructors, especially if uncomfortable supplying feedback, gave Black learners selectively more overt praise for their talents and for their work. However, they expressed these more positive evaluations in less sophisticated and more accommodating language. This dissociation between what White instructors said to Black learners and how they said it suggests that Black learners receive mixed messages about their performances and abilities. Secondary findings reconfirm and extend past research on the positive feedback bias.

ObjectivesTo determine whether a treating oncologist's characteristics are associated with variation in use of chemotherapy for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) at the end of life.Study designRetrospective cohort.MethodsUsing the 2009 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare database, we studied chemotherapy receipt within 30 days of death among Medicare enrollees who were diagnosed with aNSCLC between 1999 and 2006, received chemotherapy, and died within 3 years of diagnosis. A multilevel model was constructed to assess the contribution of patient and physician characteristics and geography to receiving chemotherapy within 30 days of death.ResultsAmong 21,894 patients meeting eligibility criteria, 43.1% received chemotherapy within 30 days of death. In unadjusted bivariate analyses, female sex, Asian or black race, older age, and a greater number of comorbid diagnoses predicted lower likelihood of receiving chemotherapy at the end of life (P ≤.038 for all comparisons). Adjusting for patient and physician characteristics, physicians in small independent practices were substantially more likely than those employed in other practice models, particularly academic practices or nongovernment hospitals, to order chemotherapy for a patient in the last 30 days of life (P

ContextAlthough recent randomized controlled trials support early palliative care for patients with advanced cancer, the specific processes of care associated with these findings and whether these improvements can be replicated in the broader health care system are uncertain.ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the occurrence of palliative care consultation and its association with specific processes of supportive care in a national cohort of Veterans using the Cancer Quality ASSIST (Assessing Symptoms Side Effects and Indicators of Supportive Treatment) measures.MethodsWe abstracted data from 719 patients' medical records diagnosed with advanced lung, colorectal, or pancreatic cancer in 2008 over a period of three years or until death who received care in the Veterans Affairs Health System to evaluate the association of palliative care specialty consultation with the quality of supportive care overall and by domain using a multivariate regression model.ResultsAll but 54 of 719 patients died within three years and 293 received at least one palliative care consult. Patients evaluated by a palliative care specialist at diagnosis scored seven percentage points higher overall (P

PurposeLittle is known about factors associated with unmet needs for symptom management in patients with cancer.MethodsPatients with a new diagnosis of lung and colorectal cancer from the diverse nationally representative Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance cohort completed a survey approximately 5 months after diagnosis (N = 5,422). We estimated the prevalence of unmet need for symptom management, defined as patients who report that they wanted help for at least one common symptom (pain, fatigue, depression, nausea/vomiting, cough, dyspnea, diarrhea) during the 4 weeks before the survey but did not receive it. We identified patient factors associated with unmet need by using logistic regression with random effects to account for clustering within study sites.ResultsOverall, 15% (791 of 5,422) of patients had at least one unmet need for symptom management. Adjusting for sociodemographic and clinical factors, African American race, being uninsured or poor, having early-stage lung cancer, and the presence of moderate to severe symptoms were associated with unmet need (all P < .05). Furthermore, patients who rated their physician's communication score < 80 (on a 0 to 100 scale) had adjusted rates of an unmet need for symptom management that were more than twice as high as patients who rated their physicians with a perfect communication score (23.1% v 10.0%; P < .001).ConclusionA significant minority of patients with newly diagnosed lung and colorectal cancer report unmet needs for symptom management. Interventions to improve symptom management should consider the importance of physician communication to the patient's experience of disease.

Despite recent increased attention to healthcare performance and the burden of disease from cancer, measures of quality of cancer care are not readily available. In 2013, the California HealthCare Foundation convened an expert workgroup to explore the potential for leveraging data in the California Cancer Registry (CCR), one of the world's largest population-based cancer registries, for measuring and improving the quality of cancer care. The workgroup assessed current registry operations, the value to be gained by linking CCR data with health insurance claims or encounter data and clinical data contained in health system electronic health records, and potential barriers to these linkages. The workgroup concluded that: 1) The CCR mandate should be expanded to include use of its data for quality of cancer care measurement and public reporting; and 2) a system should be developed to support linkage of registry data with both claims data and provider electronic health record data.

ContextRelatively few data are available about symptoms among cancer patients.ObjectivesTo describe the prevalence and severity of symptoms among a large, representative cohort of newly diagnosed cancer patients.MethodsWe collected survey data about symptoms (pain, fatigue, depression, nausea/vomiting, cough, dyspnea, and diarrhea) from 5422 patients with incident lung and colorectal cancer from the diverse, nationally representative Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance Consortium cohort. We described the prevalence of any symptoms and moderate/severe symptoms approximately four to six months after diagnosis. We used logistic regression to identify patient and clinical characteristics associated with symptoms, and calculated adjusted proportions of patients with symptoms.ResultsIn total, 5067 (93.5%) patients reported at least one symptom in the four weeks before their survey, with 51% reporting at least one moderate/severe symptom. Lung cancer patients reported more symptoms than colorectal cancer patients. Patients who received treatment or had more comorbidities were more likely to report symptoms. For example, after adjustment, patients who received chemotherapy during the six weeks before the survey were more likely than others to report at least one symptom (97.3% vs. 90.8%, P

ImportanceCharacterizing the quality of supportive cancer care can guide quality improvement.ObjectiveTo evaluate nonhospice supportive cancer care comprehensively in a national sample of veterans.Design, setting, and participantsUsing a retrospective cohort study design, we measured evidence-based cancer care processes using previously validated indicators of care quality in patients with advanced cancer, addressing pain, nonpain symptoms, and information and care planning among 719 veterans with a 2008 Veterans Affairs Central Cancer Registry diagnosis of stage IV colorectal (37.0%), pancreatic (29.8%), or lung (33.2%) cancer.Main outcomes and measuresWe abstracted medical records from diagnosis for 3 years or until death among eligible veterans (lived ≥ 30 days following diagnosis with ≥ 1 Veterans Affairs hospitalization or ≥ 2 Veterans Affairs outpatient visits). Each indicator identified a clinical scenario and an appropriate action. For each indicator for which a veteran was eligible, we determined whether appropriate care was provided. We also determined patient-level quality overall and by pain, nonpain symptoms, and information and care planning domains.ResultsMost veterans were older (mean age, 66.2 years), male (97.2%), and white (74.3%). Eighty-five percent received both inpatient and outpatient care, and 92.5% died. Overall, the 719 veterans triggered a mean of 11.7 quality indicators (range, 1-22) and received a mean 49.5% of appropriate care. Notable gaps in care were that inpatient pain screening was common (96.5%) but lacking for outpatients (58.1%). With opioids, bowel prophylaxis occurred for only 52.2% of outpatients and 70.5% of inpatients. Few patients had a timely dyspnea evaluation (15.8%) or treatment (10.8%). Outpatient assessment of fatigue occurred for 31.3%. Of patients at high risk for diarrhea from chemotherapy, 24.2% were offered appropriate antidiarrheals. Only 17.7% of veterans had goals of care addressed in the month after a diagnosis of advanced cancer, and 63.7% had timely discussion of goals following intensive care unit admission. Most decedents (86.4%) were referred to palliative care or hospice before death. Single- vs multiple-fraction radiotherapy should have been considered in 28 veterans with bone metastasis, but none were offered this option.Conclusions and relevanceThese care gaps reflect important targets for improving the patient and family experience of cancer care.

Abstract Background We describe early dissemination patterns for first-line bevacizumab given for metastatic colorectal cancer treatment. Methods We analyzed patient surveys and medical records for a population-based cohort with metastatic colorectal cancer treated in multiple regions and health systems in the United States (US). Eligible patients were diagnosed with metastatic colorectal cancer and initiated first-line chemotherapy after US Food & Drug Administration (FDA) bevacizumab approval in February 2004. First-line bevacizumab therapy was defined as receiving bevacizumab within 8 weeks of starting chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer. We evaluated factors associated with first-line bevacizumab treatment using logistic regression. Results Among 355 patients, 31% received first-line bevacizumab in the two years after FDA approval, including 26% of men, 41% of women, and 16% of those ≥ 75 years. Use rose sharply within 6 months after FDA approval, then plateaued. 20% of patients received bevacizumab in combination with irinotecan; 53% received it with oxaliplatin. Men were less likely than women to receive bevacizumab (adjusted OR 0.55; 95% CI 0.32-0.93; p = 0.026). Patients ≥ 75 years were less likely to receive bevacizumab than patients < 55 years (adjusted OR 0.13; 95% CI 0.04-0.46; p = 0.001). Conclusions One-third of eligible metastatic colorectal cancer patients received first-line bevacizumab shortly after FDA approval. Most patients did not receive bevacizumab as part of the regimen used in the pivotal study leading to FDA approval.

PurposeCurrent guidelines recommend prophylactic use of granulocyte-colony stimulating factors (G-CSF) when febrile neutropenia (FN) risk is greater than 20%. Advanced age is a risk factor for FN; however, little is known about the impact of other factors on the incidence of FN in an older population.Patients and methodsWe analyzed SEER-Medicare data (1994-2005) to develop and validate a prediction model for hospitalization with fever, infection, or neutropenia occurring after chemotherapy initiation for patients with breast, colorectal, prostate, and lung cancer.ResultsIn multivariate analysis (N = 58,053) independent predictors of FN included advanced stage at diagnosis [stage 2 (OR 1.29; 95% CI: 1.09-1.53), stage 3 (1.38; 95% CI: 1.19-1.60), and stage 4 (1.57; 95% CI: 1.35-1.83)], number of associated comorbid conditions [one condition (1.13; 95% CI: 1.02-1.28), two conditions (1.39; 95% CI: 1.22-1.57), and three or more conditions (1.81; 95% CI: 1.61-2.04)], receipt of myelosuppressive chemotherapy (1.11; 95% CI: 0.94-1.32), and receipt of chemotherapy within 1 month of diagnosis [1 to 3 months (0.70; 95% CI: 0.62-0.80) and greater than 3 months (0.63; 95% CI: 0.55-0.73)].ConclusionWe created a prediction model for febrile neutropenia with first cycle of chemotherapy in a large population of elderly patients with common malignancies.