MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1963213007 · doi:10.1200/jco.2014.58.0423

Long-Term Follow-Up of a Community Assignment, One-Time Endoscopic Screening Study of Esophageal Cancer in China

2015· article· en· W1963213007 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEsophageal Cancer Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsCAE (Canada)
FundersMinistry of Science and Technology of the People's Republic of China
KeywordsMedicineIncidence (geometry)Cumulative incidenceInternal medicinePopulationCancerEsophageal cancerDysplasiaSurgeryCohortEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: There are no global screening recommendations for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). Endoscopic screening has been investigated in areas of high incidence in China since the 1970s. This study aimed to evaluate whether an endoscopic screening and intervention program could reduce mortality caused by ESCC. METHODS: Residents age 40 to 69 years were recruited from communities with high rates of ESCC. Fourteen villages were selected as the intervention communities. Ten villages not geographically adjacent to intervention villages were selected for comparison. Participants in the intervention group were screened once by endoscopy with Lugol's iodine staining, and those with dysplasia or occult cancer were treated. All intervention participants and a sample consisting of one tenth of the control group completed questionnaires. We compared cumulative ESCC incidence and mortality between the two groups. RESULTS: Three thousand three hundred nineteen volunteers (48.62%) from an eligible population of 6,827 were screened in the intervention group. Seven hundred ninety-seven volunteers from an eligible population of 6,200 in the control group were interviewed. Six hundred fifty-two incident and 542 fatal ESCCs were identified during the 10-year follow-up. A reduction in cumulative mortality in the intervention group versus the control group was apparent (3.35% v 5.05%, respectively; P < .001). Furthermore, the intervention group had a significantly lower cumulative incidence of ESCC versus the control group (4.17% v 5.92%, respectively; P < .001). CONCLUSION: We showed that endoscopic screening and intervention significantly reduced mortality caused by esophageal cancer. Detection and treatment of preneoplastic lesions also led to a reduction in the incidence of this highly fatal cancer.

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.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.685

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.254
GPT teacher head0.522
Teacher spread0.268 · 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