MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

CT-Estimated Volume of Wilms Tumor Can Predict Weight

2005· article· en· W1966210262 on OpenAlexaff
Saud Al-Shanafey, Natalie Yanchar, Matthias H. Schmidt, Suyin A. Lum Min, Margaret Yhap

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pediatric Hematology/Oncology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRenal and related cancers
Canadian institutionsNova Scotia Health AuthorityIzaak Walton Killam Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWilms' tumorMedicineVolume (thermodynamics)Nuclear medicineBody weightWilms tumourRadiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wilms tumor weight was used to recruit patients in a recent National Wilms Tumor Study (NWTS) group trial. The authors hypothesized that a simple calculation of tumor volume based on a preoperative CT scan could predict tumor weight. The authors reviewed charts and CT images of patients with Wilms tumors who were treated at their institution between 1985 and 2002. Tumor volume was calculated as: V = 1/6pi x d (long axis) x d (short axis) x d (craniocaudal). Weight and calculated tumor volume were correlated using linear regression. Complete data of tumor weight and volume could be determined in 25 of the 49 patients. These were highly correlated (Spearman R = 0.97). Wilms tumor weight can be predicted based on a simple estimate of tumor volume on a preoperative CT scan. CT-estimated volume may replace weight as a prognostic factor and in guiding management.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations6
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pediatric Hematology/OncologySame topicRenal and related cancersFrench-language works237,207