MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W149411334 · doi:10.1093/pch/11.3.148

Understanding clinical trials in childhood cancer

2006· article· en· W149411334 on OpenAlexaff
Mason Bond, Sheila Pritchard

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsBC Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClinical trialMedicineChildhood cancerAlternative medicineFamily medicineCancerIntensive care medicineInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clinical trials in paediatric cancer continue to be a key factor in progress toward better treatment and prognosis. Paediatricians and family physicians may be asked by patients and families for their advice regarding participation in such trials. The significant advances in the success of treatment of paediatric cancer have come, in part, from the high participation rate of patients in such studies. The present article reviews the definitions and goals of phase 1, 2 and 3 trials. A known and trusted physician or paediatrician can be helpful in conjunction with the oncologist in guiding patients and their families and helping them understand the risks and benefits of participation in clinical trials.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.455
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.228
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations42
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207