MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1482902850

Anal intraepithelial dysplasia and squamous carcinoma in immunosuppressed patients.

2001· article· en· W1482902850 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mark Kotlarewsky, Joel B. Freeman, D. William Cameron, L. Grimard

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDysplasiaAnal CarcinomaAnal cancerCarcinomaSigmoidoscopyCarcinoma in situIncidence (geometry)SurgeryDermatologyColonoscopyColorectal cancerInternal medicineCancer
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To describe a treatment and follow-up protocol for HIV patients with anal dysplasia or warts, which are at risk of malignant change. DESIGN: An ongoing study of highly selected patients referred to a single surgeon. SETTING: The Colorectal and HIV/AIDS Clinics, University of Ottawa, General Campus. PATIENTS: Ninteen young men who presented with suspicious anal lesions and were referred to the Colorectal Clinic by the HIV/AIDS Clinic, which sees approximately 800 patients per year. OUTCOME MEASURE: Significance of dysplasia or carcinoma. RESULTS: Of the 19 patients, 14 had dysplasia, carcinoma-in-situ or invasive carcinoma. All were treated with multiple mapped cold biopsies and local or wide excision as indicated. Two patients with invasive carcinoma received radiotherapy or chemotherapy, or both. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of dysplasia or the sequence by which dysplasia progresses to invasive carcinoma is unknown. Surveillance of HIV patients, especially those with nodules or warts, by flexible sigmoidoscopy and Papanicolaou smears every 3 to 12 months is recommended, depending on the severity of the anal lesion.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.230 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicCervical Cancer and HPV Research→French-language works237,207→