MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1514503818 · doi:10.1007/s10269-008-0849-8

Recommandations pour la pratique clinique: Standards, Options: Recommandations 2007 pour la prise en charge des patientes atteintes de tumeurs épithéliales malignes de l’ovaire. Traitement chirurgical (rapport abrégé)

2008· article· fr· W1514503818 on OpenAlexaff
Philippe Morice, François Planchamp, Émile Daraï, Éric Leblanc, J.P. Lefranc, Denis Querleu, H. Crouet, J Dauplat, É. Fondrinier, P. Kerbrat, M. Le Taillandier, Jean‐Christophe Leveque, P. Rauch, Frédèric Selle, R. Villet

Bibliographic record

VenueONCOLOGIE · 2008
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsCentre d'expertise et de recherche en infrastructures urbaines
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGynecologyMedicineClinical PracticeFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La mise à jour de ces recommandations a été élaborée par la Fédération nationale des centres de lutte contre le cancer (FNCLCC) en partenariat avec les secteurs public, privé et l’Institut national du cancer. Actualiser les recommandations du chapitre «Traitement chirurgical» issu du rapport intégral validé en 1999. L’actualisation des Standards, Options: Recommandations (SOR) repose sur une revue et une analyse critique des données scientifiques disponsibles et sur le jugement argumenté des experts au sein d’un groupe de travail représentatif des modes et lieux d’exercice et des disciplines concernées par la prise en charge des patients atteints de cancer. Cet article présente les recommandations SOR 2007 relatives au traitement chirurgical des stades précoces et des stades avancés, établies à l’issue du processus d’actualisation.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.314
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations9
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueONCOLOGIESame topicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207