MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1509566631 · doi:10.1002/jso.23887

Radical cystectomy in patients over 80 years old in Quebec: A population‐based study of outcomes

2015· article· en· W1509566631 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ahmed S. Zakaria, Fabiano Santos, Simon Tanguay, Wassim Kassouf, Armen Aprikian

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Surgical Oncology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCystectomyMortality rateCohortComplicationCohort studyPopulationSurgeryPediatricsBladder cancerInternal medicineCancerEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To document radical cystectomy (RC) outcomes in patients over 80 years old across Quebec during the years 2000-2009 and to examine potentially related factors. METHODS: Within Quebec health insurance medical services database, we identified patients over 80 years who underwent RC. The outcomes analyzed were post-operative complications, mortality rates at 30, 60 and 90 days and overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 275 patients over 80 years old had RC performed in 38 hospitals across Quebec. Among them, 33% had major post-operative complications with 16% having more than one complication. Mortality rates at 30, 60 and 90 days were 5.8%, 9.8% and 13% respectively. 44.3% of RCs were performed in seven academic hospitals with mortality rates of 2.5%, 6.5% and 9% respectively. Community hospitals had mortality of 8.5%, 12.4% and 16.3% respectively (P < 0.001). The cohort 5-year overall survival rate was 27%. The presence of post-operative complications and the number of complications negatively affected overall survival (P < 0.001) CONCLUSION: Patients over 80 years of age have high post-RC mortality rates, especially at 90 days. In addition, it appears that they have lower post-operative mortality if their RCs were performed in academic centers. Mortality rates and complications can be used when obtaining informed consent.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.970

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.317 · 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.

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

Citations25
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Surgical OncologySame topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207