MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979101815 · doi:10.1186/1745-6215-14-s1-o5

Efficient design of a phase III trial of competing tests for personalised cancer treatment in the absence of gold standard outcome data: challenges and potential solutions

2013· article· en· W1979101815 on OpenAlexaff
Peter S Hall, Christopher McCabe, Claire Hulme, Richard Edlin, Janet Dunn, David Cameron, Robert C. Stein

Bibliographic record

VenueTrials · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGold standard (test)Outcome (game theory)Research designClinical trialPhase (matter)Internal medicineStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The OPTIMAprelim pilot trial in early breast cancer aims to select multi-parameter tests for inclusion in a phase III trial evaluating their use for patient selection for chemotherapy. Patients are randomised between universal chemotherapy or test-directed chemotherapy. A key criterion for inclusion of a test as a comparator will be the expected value of further research into its clinical and cost-effectiveness.

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 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)0.036
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.490
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0360.005
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.786
GPT teacher head0.536
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrialsSame topicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207