Variation in Delivery of Palliative Radiotherapy to Persons Dying of Cancer in Nova Scotia, 1994 to 1998
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To examine sociodemographic and clinical variables associated with provision of palliative radiotherapy (RT) to persons dying of cancer. METHODS: The Nova Scotia Cancer Registry was used to identify 9,978 adults who were dying of cancer between 1994 and 1998 in the Canadian province of Nova Scotia. RT records from between April 1992 and December 1998 were obtained from the provincial treatment database. Multivariate analysis identified factors associated with two sequential decisions determining provision of palliative RT in the last 9 months of life: likelihood of receiving an RT consultation with a radiation oncologist and, given a consultation, likelihood of being treated with palliative RT. RESULTS: The likelihood of having a consultation decreased with age (20 to 59 years v. 80+ years: odds ratio [OR], 4.43 [95% confidence interval, 3.80 to 5.15]), increased with community median household income (> $50,000 v. < $20,000: OR, 1.31 [1.02 to 1.70]), was higher for residents closer to the cancer center (< 25 km v 200+ km: OR, 2.47 [2.16 to 2.83]), increased between 1994 and 1998 (OR, 1.34 [1.16 to 1.56]), varied by cause of death (relative to thoracic cancers, head and neck: OR, 1.75 [1.31 to 2.33]; gynecologic: OR, 0.35 [0.27 to 0.44]), and was greater for those who had prior RT (OR, 2.20 [1.89 to 2.56]). Similar associations were observed when outcome was the provision of palliative RT given a consult, with one notable exception: prior RT was associated with a lower likelihood of receiving palliative RT (OR, 0.48 [0.40 to 0.58]). CONCLUSION: Variations observed in delivery of palliative RT should prompt further investigation into equity of access to clinically appropriate, palliative radiation consultation and treatment.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".