Incidence of Cutaneous Malignant Melanoma in the Ottawa Region: 1996 to 2006
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The incidence rates of invasive primary cutaneous malignant melanoma in Canada have shown a gradual tapering in recent years, after decades of increases. This trend suggests that the incidence of melanoma in Canada is stabilizing; however, knowledge of the recent trend for both in situ and invasive tumors was lacking. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine the temporal trend of both in situ and invasive melanoma within the Ottawa region over a 10-year period. METHODS: The histopathology of cutaneous melanomas diagnosed in the Ottawa region was obtained for the years 1996, 2001, and 2006 from the main diagnostic centers servicing the area; however, not all melanomas have been accounted for. All rates are expressed per 100,000 population per year. RESULTS: Melanoma incidence decreased between 1996 and 2001 (-3.83) and increased between 2001 and 2006 (+7.46; p < or = .05). This increase is mainly attributable to in situ melanoma (+5.49; p < or = .05). There has been no statistically significant change in invasive melanoma. CONCLUSIONS: Invasive melanoma incidence in the Ottawa region remained stable, whereas in situ melanoma incidence increased.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".