MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Endometrial Cancer Survival Among U.S. Black and White Women by Birth Cohort

2006· article· en· W1994587053 on OpenAlexafffund
Linda S. Cook, Leanne Kmet, Anthony M. Magliocco, Noel S. Weiss

Bibliographic record

VenueEpidemiology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEndometrial and Cervical Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsAlberta Cancer FoundationUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineDemographyBlack womenEndometrial cancerRelative survivalIncidence (geometry)EpidemiologyCohortCohort studyCase fatality rateGynecologyObstetricsCancerCancer registryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Endometrial cancer incidence is lower but mortality is higher among black relative to white women. This disparity results from a relatively higher level of case-fatality in African Americans. We investigated whether the inter-racial difference in survival has diminished in more recent birth cohorts. METHODS: Women diagnosed with endometrial malignancies during 1977-1996 were identified from the U.S. Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results program (45,261 white and 1986 black women). We calculated cumulative 5-year relative survival for 6 birth cohorts. RESULTS: Survival was relatively higher in younger women than older women and in women diagnosed in earlier years compared with more recent years. Higher survival was evident in more recent birth cohorts for groups of women 60+ years of age and in all time periods, particularly for black women. CONCLUSIONS: Although black women with endometrial cancer have a poorer prognosis than white women, the inter-racial difference in survival has narrowed in more recent birth cohorts.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 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

Citations16
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpidemiologySame topicEndometrial and Cervical Cancer TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207