MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mammography Self-Report and Mammography Claims

2006· article· en· W1996773776 on OpenAlexaff
Kathleen Holt, Peter Franks, Sean Meldrum, Kevin Fiscella

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Care · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening
Canadian institutionsCentre for Family Medicine
FundersAgency for Healthcare Research and Quality
KeywordsMammographyBeneficiaryMedicineEthnic groupDemographyFamily medicineBreast cancerCancerPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: National self-report surveys show minimal racial disparity in mammography, whereas analyses of administrative data show large disparity. METHODS: Using the 1998-2002 Medicare Current Beneficiary Surveys, which contain participants' self-report and claims data, we developed multivariable adjusted models examining factors associated with self-reported mammography and self-reported mammography verified by billing records. RESULTS: No racial/ethnic disparities were found in self-reported mammography. Verified mammography, however, revealed significant disparities for race, education, income, insurance, and health status. CONCLUSIONS: Race, education, income, insurance, and health status are associated with a lower likelihood of self-reported mammography verified by the existence of claims data. These data caution against exclusive reliance on self-report survey data to assess disparity in mammography.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.176
Threshold uncertainty score0.517

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.280 · 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.

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

Citations49
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical CareSame topicGlobal Cancer Incidence and ScreeningFrench-language works237,207