MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The effect of age and gender on bladder cancer: a critical review of the literature

2009· review· en· W1982719862 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Urology · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsMedicineReferralDiseaseEpidemiologyBladder cancerIncidence (geometry)MEDLINECancerGerontologyFamily medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While patient age and gender are important factors in the clinical decision-making for treating urothelial carcinoma of the bladder (UCB), there are no evidence-based recommendations to guide healthcare professionals. We review previous reports on the influence of age and gender on the incidence, biology, mortality and treatment of UCB. Using MEDLINE, we searched for previous reports published between January 1966 and July 2009. While men are three to four times more likely to develop UCB than women, women present with more advanced disease and have worse survival rates. The disparity among genders is proposed to be the result of a differential exposure to carcinogens (i.e. tobacco and chemicals) as well as reflecting genetic, anatomical, hormonal, societal and environmental factors. Inpatient length of stay, referral patterns for haematuria and surgical outcomes suggest that inferior quality of care for women might be an additional cause of gender inequalities. Age is the greatest single risk factor for developing UCB and dying from it once diagnosed. Elderly patients face both clinical and institutional barriers to appropriate treatment; they receive less aggressive treatment and sub-therapeutic dosing. Much evidence suggests that chronological age alone is an inadequate indicator in determining the clinical and behavioural response of older patients to UCB and its treatment. Epidemiological and mechanistic molecular studies should be encouraged to design, analyse and report gender- and age-specific associations. Improved bladder cancer awareness in the lay and medical communities, careful patient selection, treatment tailored to the needs and the physiological and physical reserve of the individual patient, and proactive postoperative care are particularly important. We must strive to develop transdisciplinary collaborative efforts to provide tailored gender- and age-specific care for patients with UCB.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.950
Threshold uncertainty score0.493

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.329 · 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