MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969914210 · doi:10.1155/2011/705305

Well-Differentiated Thyroid Carcinomas: Management of the Central Lymph Node Compartment and Emerging Biochemical Markers

2011· article· en· W1969914210 on OpenAlexaff
Meei Yeung, Janice L. Pasieka

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Oncology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThyroid Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLymph nodeThyroglobulinThyroid cancerCompartment (ship)DiseaseThyroidThyroid carcinomaLymphIncidence (geometry)OncologyPathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Well-differentiated thyroid cancers (WDTCs) are generally indolent cancers that are associated with a low mortality. Although the incidence of these tumors is increasing, there has not been an associated increase in the mortality rates. As we gain a greater understanding and more experience with these good prognosis cancers, the way in which we treat these tumors is evolving. The definition of persistent or recurrent disease has seen a shift from being a clinical and/or radiological diagnosis to now one based on a biochemical blood marker, thyroglobulin. Central lymph node metastases are a very common problem in WDTC, being present in up to 90% of patients. The optimal surgical management of the central lymph node compartment remains a hotly debated topic. This paper identifies these controversies and presents available data surrounding these issues. Biochemical tumor markers are gaining wider use in practice and in time hopefully provide more specific information with which surgical decision-making can be based. A summary of the clinically available markers is presented.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations5
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of OncologySame topicThyroid Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207