Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The 7th Annual Women’s Cancer Conference, cosponsored by the City of Hope (CA, USA) and the Nevada Cancer Institute, USA, convened in November 2007 at the Wynn Hotel in Las Vegas, Nevada. Lucille Leong and Robert Morgan, both from the City of Hope faculty, co-chaired the Women’s Cancer Conference and were pleased with the 260 attendees, 20% of whom had attended a prior Women’s Cancer Conference. The 3-day Women’s Cancer Conference is primarily directed towards the general oncologist and primary care physician seeking a more in-depth understanding of new cancer treatments and practice. The presenting faculty for the 2007 meeting came predominantly from the two host institutions, with additional speakers from around the USA. The Women’s Cancer Conference follows a case-based learning format: didactic lectures are followed by a series of individual case presentations, which are discussed in detail with full audience participation. It is estimated that over 680,000 women in the USA will develop cancer in 2007 and almost 290,000 will die of the disease. Although a decline in the use of menopausal hormone therapy has resulted in a decline in new breast cancers, breast cancer remains the most common malignancy to develop in women. Improvements in screening and therapy have been credited with the improved survival of women with early stage disease. In the USA, the leading causes of cancer-related deaths are lung, colorectal, pancreas and ovarian cancers. Worldwide, cervical cancer is a major cause of cancer mortality. The first day of the conference focused on the interdisciplinary approach to gynecologic malignancies. Lectures from oncologic surgeons, medical oncologists and pathologists highlighted the diagnosis and treatment of cervical and ovarian cancers. The human papilloma virus (HPV) is an oncogenic virus and a causative agent in cervical cancer. HPV is isolated in over 99% of all cancer specimens. The WHO has declared HPV to be the first identified ‘necessary cause’ of a human cancer. Although the routine use of PAP smears has decreased the incidence and death rate in ‘resource rich’ countries, worldwide cervical cancer continues to be a leading cause of cancer death in women. After reviewing the role of HPV in the pathogenesis of cervical cancer, Sharon Wilczynski summarized diagnostic testing for HPV. The Canadian Cervical Cancer Screening Trial compared conventional cervical cytologic testing (PAP) with FDA-approved HPV DNA testing in a population of 10,154 women aged 30–69 years who presented for routine screening. The HPV DNA test was more sensitive than the PAP – 94.5 compared with 55.4% and negative predictive values of 99.8 and 100%. A Swedish trial enrolled 12,527 women to PAP alone or to HPV DNA testing (PCR-immunoassay that is not FDA approved) plus PAP. Grade 2 or 3 cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) or cancer was identified in 51% more women undergoing both tests. However, the increased sensitivity of the HPV DNA test resulted in many more
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».