Descriptive epidemiology of skin cancer on Aruba: 1980–1995
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: An epidemiology unit was established in Aruba in 1994. The primary focus was the development of an infrastructure for both surveillance and health information data systems. This effort resulted in the first analysis of available skin cancer data. METHODS: A retrospective study of cancer and particularly skin cancer cases at the local histopathology laboratory for the period 1980-1995 was performed. All available records with a cancer diagnosis were evaluated. RESULTS: During the study period, an increase in age-adjusted rates for both men and women was observed for basal cell carcinomas and squamous cell carcinomas. No temporal trend was discerned for malignant melanoma or other skin cancers because the numbers of cases were small. Lesions were most often seen on the nose, face, and arm. Dermatologists provided the majority of skin cancer diagnoses and demonstrated the greatest diagnostic accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of a central histopathology laboratory may provide small island states, like Aruba, with important public health data. This first description of Aruba's skin cancer epidemiology provides information that may be utilized for future public health action.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".