Liver cancer TACE curative effect evaluation method and system based on patient report outcome

Abstract

The invention relates to the technical field of data management and analysis, in particular to a liver cancer TACE curative effect evaluation method and system based on patient report outcome, and the method comprises the steps: obtaining a request set monitoring request transmitted by an evaluation server, the request set monitoring request being configured with a first request set label; acquiring an associated request report and an evaluation record report corresponding to the request report according to the first request set label; performing credibility evaluation on the request report according to the evaluation record report to obtain a first credibility evaluation record; if it is determined that the request report is credible through the first credibility evaluation record, the request time point is executed according to the monitoring priority of the request time point and the perioperative key point so as to complete the target patient evaluation item. According to the invention, the problem of liver cancer TACE curative effect evaluation can be solved, the development of self-curative effect monitoring and curative effect management work of patients in clinic is promoted, and the prognosis and life quality of the patients can be improved.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present application relates to the technical field of data management and analysis, and in particular to a method and system for evaluating the efficacy of TACE for liver cancer based on patient-reported outcomes. Background Art

[0002] The treatment options for liver cancer mainly include liver resection, liver transplantation, transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE), radiofrequency ablation, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, targeted therapy and immunotherapy. Among them, liver resection is the preferred method for treating early liver cancer, which can improve the survival rate of patients to a certain extent. However, due to the hidden early onset of liver cancer, high degree of deterioration and rapid progression of the disease, 80% of liver cancer patients in my country are unable to undergo surgical resection when they seek medical treatment. TACE blocks the blood supply to the tumor on the one hand, and accumulates high concentrations of chemotherapy drugs in the local tumor at the same time, which has a maximum killing effect on tumor cells. It is recognized as the primary treatment for unresectable liver cancer, and it is also an important way of downstaging treatment before liver resection and postoperative adjuvant treatment. TACE is an important means for liver cancer patients to control disease progression, relieve symptoms and prolong survival.

[0003] Liver cancer patients will experience a variety of symptom burdens due to the influence of the disease. For example, if the tumor compresses the liver capsule before surgery, the patient will experience pain in the right upper abdomen or liver area. Cirrhosis can easily lead to portal hypertension in patients, causing gastrointestinal dysfunction and symptoms such as nausea, loss of appetite, and abdominal distension. If the malignant tumor causes nutritional absorption disorders and metabolic disorders, the patient will become emaciated and weak.

[0004] TACE is the first choice for the treatment of unresectable liver cancer. Patients with liver cancer have a heavy symptom burden and great impact after TACE treatment. How to provide an effective reference for the formulation of clinical diagnosis and treatment plans from the patient's subjective perspective, thereby improving the patient's prognosis and quality of life, is a technical problem that needs to be solved urgently in this field. Summary of the invention

[0005] To achieve the above objectives, this application provides the following technical solutions: According to the first aspect of the present invention, the present invention claims protection for a method for evaluating the efficacy of TACE for liver cancer based on patient-reported outcomes, comprising: Obtaining a request set monitoring request transmitted by an evaluation server, wherein the request set monitoring request is configured with a first request set tag; According to the first request set label, an associated request report and an evaluation record report corresponding to the request report are obtained, wherein the request report records the request time point for collecting evaluation items for the target patient, as well as the monitoring priority and perioperative key points at the request time point, and according to the multi-source TACE medical data of the request report, the monitoring cycle length of the request report is divided, and the request report is re-evaluated according to the monitoring cycle length; Performing a credibility assessment on the request report according to the assessment record report to obtain a first credibility assessment record; If the requested report is determined to be credible through the first credibility assessment record, the requested time point is executed according to the monitoring priority and perioperative key points of the requested time point to complete the target patient assessment item.

[0006] Further, the performing a credibility assessment on the request report according to the assessment record report to obtain a first credibility assessment record includes: Using a plurality of preset evaluation methods to respectively analyze the evaluation records corresponding to the request report; comparing the assessment records analyzed by the plurality of preset assessment methods with the assessment records in the assessment record report; If the evaluation records analyzed by the plurality of preset evaluation methods are all consistent with the evaluation records in the evaluation record report, then it is determined that the request report is credible; If the evaluation record analyzed by any one of the plurality of preset evaluation methods is inconsistent with the evaluation record in the evaluation record report, it is determined that the request report is not credible.

[0007] Furthermore, the method further comprises: If it is determined through the first credibility evaluation record that the request report is not credible, determining whether the request report has a secondary evaluation request report; If a secondary assessment request report exists, obtaining a secondary assessment request report corresponding to the request report and a secondary assessment record report corresponding to the secondary assessment request report; Using a plurality of preset evaluation methods to respectively analyze the secondary evaluation records corresponding to the secondary evaluation request report; comparing the secondary assessment evaluation records analyzed by the plurality of preset evaluation methods with the secondary assessment evaluation records in the secondary assessment evaluation record report; If the secondary assessment records analyzed by the plurality of preset assessment methods are all consistent with the secondary assessment records in the secondary assessment record report, then the secondary assessment request report is determined to be credible; Execute the requested time point in the secondary assessment request report to complete the target patient assessment item.

[0008] Furthermore, before obtaining the request set monitoring request transmitted by the evaluation server, the method further includes: Obtaining a request set collection request transmitted by the evaluation server, wherein the request set collection request is configured with a second request set label and a number of collection requests; Collecting requests according to the request set, obtaining request time points transmitted one by one by the evaluation server; Determine whether the number of items at the requested time point exceeds the number of items of the acquisition request; If the number of the requested time points exceeds the number of the collection requests, a request report corresponding to the second request set label is output, the requested time points are collected and saved in the request report, and the monitoring priority and perioperative key points of the requested time points are recorded in the request report; A plurality of preset evaluation methods are used to perform evaluation record analysis on the request report to output the evaluation record report corresponding to the request report.

[0009] Furthermore, the method further comprises: Determining the monitoring period length of the requested report collected based on the target patient assessment items; Determining the number of secondary evaluations corresponding to the request report according to the length of the monitoring period; According to the secondary evaluation quantity, the request report is secondary evaluated to obtain at least one secondary evaluation request report corresponding to the request report, and a secondary evaluation record report corresponding to the at least one secondary evaluation request report is output.

[0010] Furthermore, before obtaining the request set monitoring request transmitted by the evaluation server, the method further includes: In response to the request for reporting update package registration, obtaining the requested report update package and the update package evaluation record report; Performing a credibility evaluation on the request report update package according to the update package evaluation record report to obtain a second credibility evaluation record; If it is determined through the second credibility evaluation record that the request report update package has been credibly obtained, feedback evaluation success information to the evaluation server; An update request transmitted by the evaluation server according to the evaluation success information is obtained, and according to the update request, a request report corresponding to the request report update package is copied to an associated location.

[0011] Furthermore, the method further comprises: Determine whether the platform request transmitted by the evaluation server is obtained within a preset time after the secondary surgery or emergency treatment; If the platform request is not obtained within the preset time, a default request report and a default evaluation record report are obtained; Performing a credibility evaluation on the default request report according to the default evaluation record report to obtain a third credibility evaluation record; If it is determined through the third credibility evaluation record that the default request report is credible, the request time point in the default request report is executed.

[0012] According to the second aspect of the present invention, the present invention claims protection for a liver cancer TACE efficacy evaluation system based on patient-reported outcomes, comprising: A first acquisition module, configured to acquire a request set monitoring request transmitted by an evaluation server, wherein the request set monitoring request is configured with a first request set tag; A second acquisition module is used to acquire, based on the first request set label, an associated request report and an evaluation record report corresponding to the request report, wherein the request report records the request time point for collecting evaluation items for the target patient, as well as the monitoring priority and perioperative key points at the request time point, divide the monitoring cycle length of the request report based on the multi-source TACE medical data of the request report, and perform a secondary evaluation on the request report based on the monitoring cycle length; An evaluation module, configured to perform a credibility evaluation on the request report according to the evaluation record report to obtain a first credibility evaluation record; an execution module, configured to execute the requested time point according to the monitoring priority and perioperative key points of the requested time point to complete the target patient assessment item if the requested report is determined to be credible through the first credibility assessment record; The liver cancer TACE efficacy evaluation system based on patient-reported outcomes is used to execute the liver cancer TACE efficacy evaluation method based on patient-reported outcomes.

[0013] The present application relates to the technical field of data management and analysis, and in particular to a method and system for evaluating the efficacy of TACE for liver cancer based on patient-reported outcomes, obtaining a request set monitoring request transmitted by an evaluation server, wherein the request set monitoring request is configured with a first request set tag; obtaining an associated request report and an evaluation record report corresponding to the request report based on the first request set tag; performing a credibility evaluation on the request report based on the evaluation record report to obtain a first credibility evaluation record; if the request report is determined to be credible through the first credibility evaluation record, executing the request time point based on the monitoring priority and perioperative key points of the request time point to complete the target patient evaluation project. The present invention can solve the difficulty of evaluating the efficacy of TACE for liver cancer, promote the development of self-efficacy monitoring and efficacy management of patients in clinical practice, and help improve the prognosis and quality of life of patients. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0014] Figure 1 A flowchart of the method for evaluating the efficacy of TACE for liver cancer based on patient-reported outcomes claimed in the embodiments of the present application; Figure 2 A second workflow diagram of the method for evaluating the efficacy of TACE for liver cancer based on patient-reported outcomes claimed in the embodiments of the present application; Figure 3 The third workflow diagram of the method for evaluating the efficacy of TACE for liver cancer based on patient-reported outcomes claimed in the embodiments of the present application; Figure 4 The fourth workflow diagram of the method for evaluating the efficacy of TACE for liver cancer based on patient-reported outcomes claimed in the embodiments of the present application; Figure 5 This is a structural module diagram of the liver cancer TACE efficacy evaluation system based on patient-reported outcomes claimed in the embodiments of the present application; Markings in the figure: 101 - first acquisition module, 102 - second acquisition module, 103 - evaluation module, 104 - execution module. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0015] The following will be combined with the drawings in the embodiments of the present application to clearly and reliably describe the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present application. Obviously, the described embodiments are only part of the embodiments of the present application, not all of the embodiments. All other embodiments obtained by ordinary technicians in this field without creative work based on the embodiments in the present application are within the scope of protection of the present application.

[0016] The terms "first", "second" and "third" in this application are only used for descriptive purposes and cannot be understood as indicating or implying relative importance or implicitly indicating the number of indicated technical features. Therefore, the features defined as "first", "second" and "third" can explicitly or implicitly include at least one of the features. In the description of this application, the meaning of "multiple" is at least two, such as two, three, etc., unless otherwise clearly and specifically defined. All directional indications (such as up, down, left, right, front, back...) in the embodiments of this application are only used to explain the relative position relationship, movement, etc. between the components under a certain specific posture (as shown in the accompanying drawings). If the specific posture changes, the directional indication also changes accordingly. In addition, the terms "including" and "having" and any of their variations are intended to cover non-exclusive inclusions. For example, a process, method, system, product or device that includes a series of steps S or modules is not limited to the listed steps S or modules, but optionally also includes steps S or modules that are not listed, or optionally also includes other steps S or modules inherent to these processes, methods, products or devices.

[0017] Reference to "embodiments" herein means that a particular feature, structure, or characteristic described in conjunction with the embodiments may be included in at least one embodiment of the present application. The appearance of the phrase in various locations in the specification does not necessarily refer to the same embodiment, nor is it an independent or alternative embodiment that is mutually exclusive with other embodiments. It is explicitly and implicitly understood by those skilled in the art that the embodiments described herein may be combined with other embodiments.

[0018] The present application will be described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings and in combination with embodiments. It should be noted that the embodiments and features in the embodiments of the present application can be combined with each other without conflict.

[0019] Existing technologies have greatly increased the difficulty of medical effect evaluation and the cost of communication with users, while also resulting in lower treatment efficiency.

[0020] TACE is a relatively safe treatment method with minimal invasiveness, wide indications, and is not easily treatable. However, due to the embolization of tumor arteries and local high-concentration chemotherapy during the treatment process, the postoperative symptom burden is aggravated. Post-embolization syndrome (PES) is one of the most common and characteristic complications after TACE treatment. PES usually occurs within 24 to 72 hours after TACE, and its characteristic symptoms include fever, nausea or vomiting, abdominal pain, and abnormal liver function. According to previous studies, the symptoms of PES may last up to 2 weeks. The incidence of PES after TACE reported in various literatures varies greatly, ranging from 60% to 80%.

[0021] There is no consensus on the mechanism of PES. At present, it is believed that it may be related to the release of inflammatory mediators caused by tumor ischemia or necrotic tissue due to surgery and the systemic effects of chemotherapy drugs. PES is considered to be a self-limiting disease, and when the symptoms are mild, they usually resolve on their own. However, if moderate to severe symptoms are not treated in time, it may have an adverse effect on the patient's prognosis and quality of life.

[0022] Studies have reported that a negative experience with the first TACE can affect patients’ confidence in treatment, reduce their quality of life and compliance, and negatively affect their subsequent treatment. In addition, severe PES may also lead to prolonged hospitalization, increased medical expenses, and increased psychological, physiological, and economic burdens on patients. A prospective study found that the median survival of liver cancer patients with PES was significantly lower than that of patients without PES (6.8 months vs. 12 months).

[0023] Due to the multiple blood supply arteries and rich collateral circulation of liver malignant tumors, the blood supply arteries of tumors cannot be completely embolized at one time. Therefore, TACE for liver cancer patients requires multiple sequential treatments to control tumor progression. Therefore, how to reduce the symptom burden after TACE treatment, improve the treatment effect and tolerance, and improve the quality of life of patients is crucial in the symptom management of liver cancer patients after TACE.

[0024] In order to solve the above problems, the present invention provides a method for evaluating the efficacy of TACE for liver cancer based on patient-reported outcomes, such as Figure 1 As shown, the method includes: Step S10: Obtain a request set monitoring request transmitted by the evaluation server.

[0025] The request set monitoring request is configured with a first request set tag, and the request set tag is used to point to a request report, which is stored inside the medical effect evaluation.

[0026] In order to reduce the difficulty of medical effect evaluation and the communication cost with the user, the embodiment of the present invention saves the request time points involved in the patient evaluation items frequently performed in the medical effect evaluation, as well as the monitoring priority and perioperative key points at the request time points in a designated request report, thereby reducing the difficulty of medical effect evaluation and the communication cost with the user, and improving the treatment efficiency and reliability of the medical effect evaluation.

[0027] After the implementation of TACE treatment, if the medical effect evaluation is successfully executed, the medical effect evaluation will feedback the status information of the successful execution to the patient's family terminal through the evaluation server. After obtaining the status information of the successful execution of the medical effect evaluation, if the patient's family terminal needs to treat the medical effect evaluation, it will transmit the request set monitoring request to the evaluation server. The evaluation server forwards the request set monitoring request to the medical effect evaluation. The request set monitoring request includes a first request set tag, and the first request set tag is used to point to the collected request report. The request report records the request time point involved in the execution of the medical effect evaluation-related patient evaluation items, as well as the monitoring priority and perioperative key points of the request time point.

[0028] Step S20: According to the first request set label, obtain the associated request report and the evaluation record report corresponding to the request report.

[0029] Among them, the request report records the request time point for the collection of assessment items for the target patient, as well as the monitoring priority and perioperative key points at the request time point. In addition, the evaluation record report records the evaluation value corresponding to the request report, which is stored together with the request report in the medical effect evaluation. At the same time, the monitoring cycle length of the request report can be divided according to the multi-source TACE medical data of the request report, and the request report can be secondary evaluated according to the monitoring cycle length. The multi-source TACE medical data includes the patient assessment item type, safety risks and time sensitivity of the request report.

[0030] Among them, in this embodiment, the perioperative key points include at least: before surgery (T0), surgery day (T1), one day after surgery (T2), two days after surgery (T3), three days after surgery (T4), one week after surgery (T5), two weeks after surgery (T6), three weeks after surgery (T7), one month after surgery (T8), two months after surgery (T9), and three months after surgery (T10).

[0031] For the embodiment of the present invention, after the medical effect evaluation obtains the request set monitoring request transmitted by the evaluation server, it determines whether an associated request report is saved based on the first request set label configured in the request set monitoring request. If an associated request report is saved, the request report is further evaluated for credibility.

[0032] Step S30: Perform a credibility assessment on the request report according to the assessment record report to obtain a first credibility assessment record.

[0033] For the embodiment of the present invention, when performing credibility assessment on the request report, a preset assessment method can be used to analyze the assessment record of the request report to obtain the assessment record corresponding to the request report. It should be noted that the preset assessment method used in the embodiment of the present invention is not limited to the assessment methods listed above, and can also be other assessment methods.

[0034] After analyzing the evaluation record corresponding to the request report, the analyzed evaluation record is compared with the evaluation record in the evaluation record report. If the evaluation records of the two are consistent, it means that the request report is credible; if the evaluation records of the two are inconsistent, it means that the request report is not credible, and a bit jump may have occurred at the request time point in the request report.

[0035] It should be noted that the evaluation method used in the embodiment of the present invention when analyzing the evaluation record corresponding to the request report needs to be the same as the evaluation method used in the evaluation record report.

[0036] Furthermore, in order to improve the accuracy of the credibility assessment of the request report and ensure the accuracy of the credibility assessment record of the request report, the embodiment of the present invention can also use multiple preset assessment methods to perform credibility assessment on the request report. For this process, the method includes: using multiple preset assessment methods to analyze the assessment records corresponding to the request report respectively; comparing the assessment records analyzed by the multiple preset assessment methods with the assessment records in the assessment record report; if the assessment records analyzed by the multiple preset assessment methods are consistent with the assessment records in the assessment record report, then the request report is determined to be credible; if the assessment record analyzed by any one of the multiple preset assessment methods is inconsistent with the assessment record in the assessment record report, then the request report is determined to be unreliable.

[0037] Among them, the assessment record report contains assessment records analyzed using a variety of preset assessment methods.

[0038] For the embodiment of the present invention, in order to ensure the accuracy of the request report credibility assessment record, when the assessment records analyzed for the request report using multiple preset assessment methods are consistent with the assessment records in the assessment record report, the request report is determined to be credible; if the assessment records analyzed by any one of the assessment methods are inconsistent with the associated assessment records in the assessment record report, the request report is determined to be unreliable.

[0039] In a specific application scenario, in order to ensure that some important patient assessment items can be smoothly executed by the medical effect assessment, the request report corresponding to the patient assessment item will be re-evaluated. When it is determined that the request report is not credible, the secondary assessment request report corresponding to the request report and the secondary assessment record report corresponding to the secondary assessment request report can also be obtained. Based on this, the method includes: if the request report is determined to be unreliable through the first credibility assessment record, then determine whether there is a secondary assessment request report for the request report; if there is a secondary assessment request report, then obtain the secondary assessment request report corresponding to the request report, and the secondary assessment record report corresponding to the secondary assessment request report; use multiple preset assessment methods to analyze the secondary assessment records corresponding to the secondary assessment request report respectively; compare the secondary assessment records analyzed by the multiple preset assessment methods with the secondary assessment records in the secondary assessment record report; if the secondary assessment records analyzed by the multiple preset assessment methods are all consistent with the secondary assessment records in the secondary assessment record report, then determine that the secondary assessment request report is credible; execute the request time point in the secondary assessment request report to complete the target patient assessment item.

[0040] The number of secondary evaluation request reports may be one, two or more, and the number of secondary evaluation request reports depends on the importance of the request reports involved in the patient evaluation items of the medical effectiveness evaluation.

[0041] Step S40: If the requested report is determined to be credible through the first credibility assessment record, the requested time point is executed according to the monitoring priority and perioperative key points of the requested time point to complete the target patient assessment item.

[0042] For an embodiment of the present invention, if it is determined that the request report is credible, the medical effect evaluation software will read the request time point in the request report, as well as the monitoring priority and perioperative key points at the request time point, and complete the specific patient evaluation project according to the monitoring priority and perioperative key points; if it is determined that the request report is not credible, a prompt message of monitoring failure will be fed back to the evaluation server, and the monitoring process will be exited.

[0043] In some embodiments, the medical effect evaluation needs to perform request set collection and packaging before performing request set monitoring. Figure 2 As shown, including: Step S50: Obtain a request set collection request transmitted by the evaluation server.

[0044] The request set collection request is configured with a second request set tag and the number of collection requests. The second request set tag is used to point to the request report. The second request set tag and the first request set tag may be the same or different. For example, the second request set tag and the first request set tag are both X, and both point to the request report 000. For another example, the second request set tag is X, and the first request set tag is Y, and both point to the request report 000.

[0045] For the embodiment of the present invention, after the TACE treatment is implemented, if the medical effect evaluation is successfully executed, the medical effect evaluation will feedback the status information of the successful execution to the patient's family terminal through the evaluation server. After obtaining the status information of the successful execution of the medical effect evaluation, the patient's family terminal will transmit the request set collection request to the medical effect evaluation through the evaluation server, and transmit the requests involved in the specific patient evaluation items to the medical effect evaluation one by one according to the set request perioperative key points.

[0046] Step S60: Acquire the request time points transmitted by the evaluation server one by one according to the request set collection request.

[0047] According to the embodiment of the present invention, after obtaining the request set collection request, the medical effect evaluation will obtain the requests forwarded by the evaluation server one by one according to the request set collection request.

[0048] Step S70: Determine whether the number of items at the requested time point exceeds the number of items of collection requests.

[0049] For the embodiment of the present invention, if the medical effect evaluation obtains a certain request and does not obtain another request within a preset time period, it means that the evaluation server has forwarded all requests. At this time, the medical effect evaluation will determine whether the obtained requests reach N according to the number of collection requests N configured in the request set collection request.

[0050] Step S80: If the number of requested time points exceeds the number of collection requests, output the request report corresponding to the second request set label, save the requested time point collection in the request report, and record the monitoring priority and perioperative key points of the requested time point in the request report.

[0051] For the embodiment of the present invention, if the requests obtained by the medical effect evaluation reach the number of collection requests (N), a request report is created, and the multiple requests obtained are collected and saved in the request report as request time points, and the monitoring priority and perioperative key points of the request time point are recorded in the request report; if the requests obtained by the medical effect evaluation do not reach the number of collection requests, the collection and preservation of the request time point are not performed, and the medical effect evaluation needs to be re-executed and the request collection needs to be re-performed.

[0052] The medical effect evaluation in the embodiment of the present invention can accurately determine whether all transmission requests have been obtained by collecting the number of requests, thereby further ensuring the credibility and accuracy of the collected request report.

[0053] In this embodiment, SPSS 25.0 and Stata software were used for statistical analysis. All statistical tests were two-sided tests, α=0.05, and P<0.05 was considered statistically significant.

[0054] Descriptive statistics: Rate, frequency, percentage, and mean ± standard deviation were used to describe the general data of the patients. Frequency and percentage were used to describe the incidence of symptoms in liver cancer patients at different time periods before and after TACE surgery, and mean ± standard deviation was used to describe the severity of symptoms and the scores of various dimensions of quality of life.

[0055] Statistical inference: Repeated measures analysis of variance was used to compare the longitudinal changes in the number, severity, and total scores of perioperative symptoms of liver cancer patients in different time periods. Latent variable mixed growth models were also used to analyze trends and changes in the data.

[0056] The data obtained from the two rounds of consultation were entered and statistically analyzed using Excel 2012 and SPSS 25.0 software. SPSS 25.0 software was used to calculate the frequency and composition ratio of count data, and the mean, standard deviation and coefficient of variation of measurement data. The expert familiarity coefficient is represented by Cs, the expert judgment coefficient is represented by Ca, and the expert authority coefficient is generally represented by Cr, and the calculation formula is Cr=(Cs+Ca) / 2. CV represents the ratio of standard deviation to mean, and its formula is: CV = (standard deviation / mean).

[0057] The experimental group received a postoperative phased intervention program, and the control group received a postoperative conventional intervention program. Quality of life was selected as the main outcome indicator, and the sample size calculation tool PASS15.0 was used. According to previous literature reports, the test power was set to 0.9, a was set to 0.05, and after literature review, the parameters m1 was set to 65, m2 was set to 60, and d was set to 10. The experimental group and the control group were 1:1, and the required sample size for the experimental group and the control group was calculated to be 35 respectively. According to clinical practice, considering the dropout rate of 20%, the final sample size was considered to be 84 cases, with 42 cases in the experimental group and 42 cases in the control group.

[0058] A preliminary experiment was conducted, and 5 patients with liver cancer undergoing TACE who met the inclusion requirements were selected for the pilot experiment, the feasibility of the intervention plan formulated in the early stage was evaluated, and the plan was further improved.

[0059] Main evaluation indicators: Quality of life; Secondary evaluation indicators included satisfaction, incidence and severity of postoperative symptoms, etc.

[0060] SPSS25.0 software was used to establish the database. According to whether the data obeyed the normal distribution, the mean, standard deviation, median, and quartile were used to describe the measurement data, and the frequency and rate were used to describe the count data. According to the nature of the data, two independent sample t-tests, chi-square tests, and rank sum tests were used to compare whether there were any differences in the indicators between the two groups.

[0061] Step S90: Use a plurality of preset evaluation methods to perform evaluation record analysis on the request report to output the evaluation record report corresponding to the request report.

[0062] After completing the collection of the request report, in order to facilitate the subsequent credibility evaluation of the request report, the embodiment of the present invention needs to output the evaluation record report corresponding to the request report while collecting the request report, and save the request report and the evaluation record report together.

[0063] In some embodiments, in order to ensure that the target patient assessment items can be executed sequentially, some important request reports need to be re-evaluated. Accordingly, the method includes: determining the monitoring cycle length of the collected request report according to the target patient assessment items; determining the number of re-evaluations corresponding to the request report according to the monitoring cycle length; performing a re-evaluation on the request report according to the number of re-evaluations, obtaining at least one re-evaluation request report corresponding to the request report, and outputting a re-evaluation record report corresponding to the at least one re-evaluation request report.

[0064] Specifically, according to different patient assessment items, the corresponding request reports can be divided into multiple monitoring cycle lengths. The longer the monitoring cycle length, the more request reports need to be re-evaluated; conversely, the shorter the monitoring cycle length, the fewer request reports need to be re-evaluated. While performing a secondary assessment on the request report, it is also necessary to output a secondary assessment record report corresponding to the secondary assessment request report, and each secondary assessment request report corresponds to a secondary assessment record report. Among them, the monitoring cycle length can be divided into multiple ones according to actual business needs.

[0065] When dividing the monitoring cycle length of the request report, it is necessary not only to consider the type of patient assessment project, but also to consider security risks and time sensitivity. Among them, for some relatively important patient assessment projects, the monitoring cycle length corresponding to the request report will be relatively long. In addition, the operations involved in the request report may bring risks to system security and data security. Therefore, the higher the security risk, the longer the monitoring cycle length of the request report. Furthermore, some request reports need to be executed within a specific time limit, and exceeding the deadline may have a serious impact on the business. Therefore, the monitoring cycle length of these request reports is relatively long. Based on the above factors that affect the monitoring cycle length of the request report (the type of patient assessment project, security risks and time sensitivity), the embodiment of the present invention can use a neural network method to predict the monitoring cycle length corresponding to the request report.

[0066] When predicting the monitoring period length corresponding to the requested report based on the type of patient assessment project, the safety risk and time sensitivity of the requested report, first determine the feature vector corresponding to the requested report based on the type of patient assessment project, the safety risk and time sensitivity of the requested report, and then input the feature vector corresponding to the requested report into the preset monitoring period length prediction model to predict the monitoring period length, and obtain the monitoring period length corresponding to the requested report. The preset monitoring period length prediction model can specifically be a neural network model, such as a multi-layer perceptron.

[0067] Specifically, first determine the associated characteristic components according to the type of patient assessment items, such as the characteristic component corresponding to patient assessment item A is 001, the characteristic component corresponding to patient assessment item B is 010, and the characteristic component corresponding to patient assessment item C is 001. In addition, if the request report has a security risk, its corresponding characteristic component is 01, and if the request report does not have a security risk, its corresponding characteristic component is 10. Similarly, if the request set in the request report is more sensitive to time, its corresponding characteristic component is 01, and on the contrary, if the request set in the request report is not sensitive to time, its corresponding characteristic component is 10. Thus, according to the above method, the characteristic components corresponding to each influencing factor can be determined, and then each characteristic component is horizontally spliced ​​to obtain the characteristic vector corresponding to the request report, and then the characteristic vector corresponding to the request report is input into the preset monitoring cycle length prediction model to predict the monitoring cycle length, and the probability value of the request report belonging to different monitoring cycle lengths is obtained, and finally the maximum probability value is selected from each probability value, and the maximum probability to the corresponding monitoring cycle length is determined as the target monitoring cycle length corresponding to the request report. After determining the target monitoring cycle length corresponding to the request report, the number of request reports that need secondary evaluation can be determined.

[0068] The embodiment of the present invention can accurately determine the monitoring period length corresponding to the requested report by presetting the monitoring period length prediction model, thereby ensuring the accuracy of the secondary evaluation quantity determination record.

[0069] In addition to collecting requests through request sets, the embodiments of the present invention can collect and save the request time points involved in the specific patient evaluation items in the medical effect evaluation, and directly transmit the pre-configured request report to the medical effect evaluation. The above two methods are after the TACE treatment is implemented. Before the TACE treatment is implemented, the pre-configured request report can be preset in the medical effect evaluation. In some embodiments, the request report within the medical effect evaluation can also be updated. Figure 3 As shown, including: Step S100: In response to a request for reporting an update package registration, obtaining a request reporting an update package and an update package evaluation record report.

[0070] The update package evaluation record report is used to verify the credibility of the update package requested for the report.

[0071] For the embodiment of the present invention, after the patient's family terminal obtains the status information of the successful execution of the medical effect evaluation, the patient's family terminal will transmit an update package registration request to the medical effect evaluation through the evaluation server. The registration request is configured with a request report update package and an update package evaluation record report.

[0072] Step S110: Perform a credibility evaluation on the request report update package according to the update package evaluation record report to obtain a second credibility evaluation record.

[0073] For the embodiment of the present invention, a preset evaluation method is used to analyze the evaluation record of the request report update package. If the evaluation record is consistent with the evaluation record in the update package evaluation record report, it means that the request report update package is credible; if the evaluation record is inconsistent with the evaluation record in the update package evaluation record report, it means that the request report update package is unreliable.

[0074] Step S120: If it is determined through the second credibility evaluation record that the request report update package has been reliably obtained, feedback of evaluation success information is sent to the evaluation server.

[0075] For the embodiment of the present invention, if the medical effect evaluation verification request report update package is credible, the evaluation success information is fed back to the evaluation server, and the evaluation server then feeds back the evaluation success information to the patient's family terminal; if the medical effect evaluation verification request report update package is not credible, it means that the update has failed and needs to be re-introduced.

[0076] Step S130: obtaining an update request transmitted by the evaluation server according to the evaluation success information, and copying the request report corresponding to the request report update package to an associated location according to the update request.

[0077] In the embodiment of the present invention, after obtaining the evaluation success information, the patient's family terminal transmits an update request to the evaluation server, and the evaluation server forwards the update request to the medical effect evaluation. The medical effect evaluation copies the request report corresponding to the request report update package to the location of the request report collected in advance according to the update request, and replaces or updates the collected request report. In this way, the request report collected by the medical effect evaluation can be updated, thereby realizing the functional upgrade of the medical effect evaluation.

[0078] Furthermore, during the update process, it is necessary to monitor in real time whether the update request is executed normally, that is, whether the request report corresponding to the request report update package is saved in the designated location within the medical effect evaluation. If the update request is not executed normally, it is necessary to analyze the cause of the failure.

[0079] Among them, the preset cause analysis model can specifically be a neural network model, such as a multi-layer perceptron, a convolutional neural network, and a support vector machine.

[0080] In some embodiments, if the medical effect evaluation temporarily does not receive a request transmitted by the evaluation server after execution, the default request time point may be executed first. Figure 4 As shown, including: Step S140: Determine whether a platform request transmitted by the evaluation server is obtained within a preset time period after the secondary surgery or emergency treatment.

[0081] The preset duration may be set according to actual business requirements, and the embodiment of the present invention does not specifically limit this.

[0082] For the embodiment of the present invention, after the secondary surgery or emergency treatment for medical effect evaluation, it is determined whether the platform request sent by the evaluation server is obtained within the preset time period. If the platform request is obtained, the platform request is executed.

[0083] Step S150: If the platform request is not obtained within the preset time period, a default request report and a default evaluation record report are obtained.

[0084] For an embodiment of the present invention, if no platform request is obtained within the preset time period, it is determined whether there is a default request report. If there is no default request report, the platform request is waited for; if there is a default request report, the default evaluation record report corresponding to the default request report is obtained so as to perform a credibility assessment on the default request report.

[0085] It should be noted that the default request report of the embodiment of the present invention can also be pre-saved in the medical effect evaluation through the request set collection request.

[0086] Step S160: Perform a credibility evaluation on the default request report according to the default evaluation record report to obtain a third credibility evaluation record.

[0087] For the embodiment of the present invention, a preset evaluation method can be used to analyze the evaluation record of the default request report, and then the analyzed evaluation record is compared with the evaluation record in the default evaluation record report. If the two are inconsistent, it is determined that the default request report is unreliable, and the platform request is waited for; if the two are consistent, it is determined that the default request report is credible.

[0088] Step S170: If it is determined through the third credibility evaluation record that the default request report is credible, the request time point in the default request report is executed.

[0089] The embodiment of the present invention can perform a series of default configurations or conventional symptoms after a secondary operation for medical effect evaluation through the above design.

[0090] Further, as Figure 1-Figure 4 The specific implementation of the method shown in this embodiment provides a liver cancer TACE efficacy evaluation system based on patient-reported outcomes, such as Figure 5 As shown, the system includes: a first acquisition module 101 , a second acquisition module 102 , an evaluation module 103 and an execution module 104 .

[0091] The first acquisition module 101 may be used to acquire a request set monitoring request transmitted by an evaluation server, wherein the request set monitoring request is configured with a first request set tag.

[0092] The second acquisition module 102 can be used to obtain the associated request report and the evaluation record report corresponding to the request report based on the first request set label, wherein the request report records the request time point for collecting the evaluation items for the target patient, as well as the monitoring priority and perioperative key points at the request time point, and divides the monitoring cycle length of the request report based on the multi-source TACE medical data of the request report, and performs a secondary evaluation on the request report based on the monitoring cycle length.

[0093] The evaluation module 103 may be configured to perform a credibility evaluation on the request report according to the evaluation record report to obtain a first credibility evaluation record.

[0094] The execution module 104 can be used to execute the requested time point according to the monitoring priority and perioperative key points of the requested time point to complete the target patient assessment project if the requested report is determined to be credible through the first credibility assessment record.

[0095] In some embodiments, the evaluation module 103 includes: an analysis module, a comparison module and a determination module.

[0096] The analysis module may be configured to respectively analyze the evaluation records corresponding to the request report using a plurality of preset evaluation methods.

[0097] The comparison module may be used to compare the evaluation records analyzed by the plurality of preset evaluation methods with the evaluation records in the evaluation record report.

[0098] The determination module may be configured to determine that the request report is credible if the evaluation records analyzed by the plurality of preset evaluation methods are all consistent with the evaluation records in the evaluation record report.

[0099] The determination module may also be configured to determine that the request report is unreliable if the evaluation record analyzed by any one of the plurality of preset evaluation methods is inconsistent with the evaluation record in the evaluation record report.

[0100] In some embodiments, the system further includes: a judgment module.

[0101] The judgment module may be configured to determine whether there is a secondary evaluation request report for the request report if it is determined through the first credibility evaluation record that the request report is not credible.

[0102] The second acquisition module 102 may also be configured to acquire, if a secondary evaluation request report exists, a secondary evaluation request report corresponding to the request report and a secondary evaluation record report corresponding to the secondary evaluation request report.

[0103] The evaluation module 103 can also be used to adopt multiple preset evaluation methods to analyze the secondary evaluation records corresponding to the secondary evaluation request report respectively; compare the secondary evaluation records analyzed by the multiple preset evaluation methods with the secondary evaluation records in the secondary evaluation record report; if the secondary evaluation records analyzed by the multiple preset evaluation methods are consistent with the secondary evaluation records in the secondary evaluation record report, then determine that the secondary evaluation request report is credible.

[0104] The execution module 104 may also be used to execute the requested time point in the secondary evaluation request report to complete the target patient evaluation item.

[0105] In some embodiments, the system further includes: a collection module and an analysis module.

[0106] The first acquisition module 101 may also be used to acquire a request set collection request transmitted by the evaluation server, wherein the request set collection request is configured with a second request set tag and the number of collection requests.

[0107] The first acquisition module 101 may also be used to collect requests according to the request set and acquire request time points transmitted one by one by the evaluation server.

[0108] The judgment module may also be used to determine whether the number of the request time points exceeds the number of the acquisition requests.

[0109] The collection module can be used to output a request report corresponding to the second request set label if the number of requested time points exceeds the number of collection requests, collect and save the requested time points in the request report, and record the monitoring priority and perioperative key points of the requested time points in the request report.

[0110] The analysis module may be configured to perform evaluation record analysis on the request report using a plurality of preset evaluation methods, so as to output the evaluation record report corresponding to the request report.

[0111] In some embodiments, the system further includes: a secondary assessment module.

[0112] The secondary assessment module can be used to determine the monitoring period length of the collected request report based on the target patient assessment item; determine the number of secondary assessments corresponding to the request report based on the monitoring period length; perform a secondary assessment on the request report based on the secondary assessment number to obtain at least one secondary assessment request report corresponding to the request report, and output a secondary assessment record report corresponding to the at least one secondary assessment request report.

[0113] In some embodiments, the system further includes: an update module.

[0114] The update module can be used to respond to a request for a report update package to obtain a request report update package and an update package evaluation record report; perform a credibility assessment on the request report update package based on the update package evaluation record report to obtain a second credibility assessment record; if it is determined through the second credibility assessment record that the request report update package has been reliably obtained, feedback evaluation success information to the evaluation server; obtain an update request transmitted by the evaluation server based on the evaluation success information, and copy the request report corresponding to the request report update package to an associated location based on the update request.

[0115] In some embodiments, the judgment module can also be used to determine whether a platform request transmitted by the evaluation server is obtained within a preset time period after a secondary operation or emergency treatment.

[0116] The second acquisition module 102 may also be configured to acquire a default request report and a default evaluation record report if the platform request is not acquired within a preset time period.

[0117] The evaluation module 103 may also be configured to perform a credibility evaluation on the default request report according to the default evaluation record report to obtain a third credibility evaluation record.

[0118] The execution module 104 may also be configured to execute the request time point in the default request report if it is determined that the default request report is credible through the third credibility evaluation record.

[0119] It should be noted that for other related descriptions of the functional modules involved in the liver cancer TACE efficacy evaluation system based on patient-reported outcomes provided in this embodiment, please refer to Figure 1-Figure 4 The corresponding description in will not be repeated here.

[0120] In the several embodiments provided in the present application, it should be understood that the disclosed systems, systems and methods can be implemented in other ways. For example, the system embodiments described above are only schematic. For example, the division of modules is only a logical function division. There may be other division methods in actual implementation, such as multiple modules or components can be combined or integrated into another system, or some features can be ignored or not executed. Another point is that the mutual coupling or direct coupling or communication connection shown or discussed can be through some interfaces, indirect coupling or communication connection of systems or modules, which can be electrical, mechanical or other forms.

[0121] In addition, each functional module in each embodiment of the present application can be integrated into a processing module, or each module can exist physically separately, or two or more modules can be integrated into one module. The above integrated modules can be implemented in the form of hardware or in the form of software functional modules. The above is only an implementation method of the present application, and does not limit the patent scope of the present application. Any equivalent structure or equivalent process transformation made using the contents of the specification and drawings of this application, or directly or indirectly used in other related technical fields, are also included in the patent protection scope of the present application.

[0122] The specific implementation methods of the invention are described in detail above, but they are only examples, and the present application is not limited to the specific implementation methods described above. For those skilled in the art, any equivalent modification or substitution of the invention is also within the scope of the present application, and therefore, the equalization, modification, and improvement made without departing from the spirit and principle of the present application should be included in the scope of the present application.

Claims

1. A method for evaluating the efficacy of TACE for liver cancer based on patient-reported outcomes, characterized in that: include: Obtaining a request set monitoring request transmitted by an evaluation server, wherein the request set monitoring request is configured with a first request set tag; According to the first request set label, an associated request report and an evaluation record report corresponding to the request report are obtained, wherein the request report records the request time point for collecting evaluation items for the target patient, as well as the monitoring priority and perioperative key points at the request time point, and according to the multi-source TACE medical data of the request report, the monitoring cycle length of the request report is divided, and the request report is re-evaluated according to the monitoring cycle length; Performing a credibility assessment on the request report according to the assessment record report to obtain a first credibility assessment record; If the requested report is determined to be credible through the first credibility assessment record, the requested time point is executed according to the monitoring priority and perioperative key points of the requested time point to complete the target patient assessment item.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that The step of performing a credibility assessment on the request report according to the assessment record report to obtain a first credibility assessment record includes: Using a plurality of preset evaluation methods to respectively analyze the evaluation records corresponding to the request report; comparing the assessment records analyzed by the plurality of preset assessment methods with the assessment records in the assessment record report; If the evaluation records analyzed by the plurality of preset evaluation methods are all consistent with the evaluation records in the evaluation record report, then it is determined that the request report is credible; If the evaluation record analyzed by any one of the plurality of preset evaluation methods is inconsistent with the evaluation record in the evaluation record report, it is determined that the request report is not credible.

3. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that The method further comprises: If it is determined through the first credibility evaluation record that the request report is not credible, determining whether the request report has a secondary evaluation request report; If a secondary assessment request report exists, obtaining a secondary assessment request report corresponding to the request report and a secondary assessment record report corresponding to the secondary assessment request report; Using a plurality of preset evaluation methods to respectively analyze the secondary evaluation records corresponding to the secondary evaluation request report; comparing the secondary assessment evaluation records analyzed by the plurality of preset evaluation methods with the secondary assessment evaluation records in the secondary assessment evaluation record report; If the secondary assessment records analyzed by the plurality of preset assessment methods are all consistent with the secondary assessment records in the secondary assessment record report, then the secondary assessment request report is determined to be credible; Execute the requested time point in the secondary assessment request report to complete the target patient assessment item.

4. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that Before obtaining the request set monitoring request transmitted by the evaluation server, the method further includes: Obtaining a request set collection request transmitted by the evaluation server, wherein the request set collection request is configured with a second request set label and a number of collection requests; Collecting requests according to the request set, obtaining request time points transmitted one by one by the evaluation server; Determine whether the number of items at the requested time point exceeds the number of items of the acquisition request; If the number of the requested time points exceeds the number of the collection requests, a request report corresponding to the second request set label is output, the requested time points are collected and saved in the request report, and the monitoring priority and perioperative key points of the requested time points are recorded in the request report; A plurality of preset evaluation methods are used to perform evaluation record analysis on the request report to output the evaluation record report corresponding to the request report.

5. The method according to claim 4, characterized in that The method further comprises: Determining the monitoring period length of the requested report collected based on the target patient assessment items; Determining the number of secondary evaluations corresponding to the request report according to the length of the monitoring period; According to the secondary evaluation quantity, the request report is secondary evaluated to obtain at least one secondary evaluation request report corresponding to the request report, and a secondary evaluation record report corresponding to the at least one secondary evaluation request report is output.

6. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that Before obtaining the request set monitoring request transmitted by the evaluation server, the method further includes: In response to the request for reporting update package registration, obtaining the requested report update package and the update package evaluation record report; Performing a credibility evaluation on the request report update package according to the update package evaluation record report to obtain a second credibility evaluation record; If it is determined through the second credibility evaluation record that the request report update package has been credibly obtained, feedback evaluation success information to the evaluation server; An update request transmitted by the evaluation server according to the evaluation success information is obtained, and according to the update request, a request report corresponding to the request report update package is copied to an associated location.

7. The method according to any one of claims 1 to 6, characterized in that: The method further comprises: Determine whether the platform request transmitted by the evaluation server is obtained within a preset time after the secondary surgery or emergency treatment; If the platform request is not obtained within the preset time, a default request report and a default evaluation record report are obtained; Performing a credibility evaluation on the default request report according to the default evaluation record report to obtain a third credibility evaluation record; If it is determined through the third credibility evaluation record that the default request report is credible, the request time point in the default request report is executed.

8. A TACE efficacy evaluation system for liver cancer based on patient-reported outcomes, characterized by: include: A first acquisition module, configured to acquire a request set monitoring request transmitted by an evaluation server, wherein the request set monitoring request is configured with a first request set tag; A second acquisition module is used to acquire, based on the first request set label, an associated request report and an evaluation record report corresponding to the request report, wherein the request report records the request time point for collecting evaluation items for the target patient, as well as the monitoring priority and perioperative key points at the request time point, divide the monitoring cycle length of the request report based on the multi-source TACE medical data of the request report, and perform a secondary evaluation on the request report based on the monitoring cycle length; An evaluation module, configured to perform a credibility evaluation on the request report according to the evaluation record report to obtain a first credibility evaluation record; an execution module, configured to execute the requested time point according to the monitoring priority and perioperative key points of the requested time point to complete the target patient assessment item if the requested report is determined to be credible through the first credibility assessment record; The liver cancer TACE efficacy evaluation system based on patient-reported outcomes is used to execute the liver cancer TACE efficacy evaluation method based on patient-reported outcomes as described in any one of claims 1-7.

Images