MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002312553 · doi:10.1097/coc.0b013e31816fc920

Meningiomas in 2009

2009· review· en· W2002312553 on OpenAlexaff
Belinda A. Campbell, Ashu Jhamb, John A. Maguire, Brian Toyota, Roy Ma

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Clinical Oncology · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMeningioma and schwannoma management
Canadian institutionsVancouver General HospitalBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMeningiomaRadiation therapyEpidemiologyTranslational researchMedical physicsPathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Meningiomas are the most common intracranial primary neoplasm in adults. Over recent years, interest in this clinically diverse group of tumors has intensified, bringing new questions and challenges to the fore, particularly in the fields of epidemiology, radiology, pathology, genetics, and treatment. Interest in modern meningioma research has been stimulated by the high tumor prevalence and the advances in technology. The incidence of meningiomas is climbing, and may indicate increased exposure to environmental risk factors or more sensitive diagnostic modalities. Technological advances have dramatically improved radiologic imaging and radiotherapy treatments, and further refinements are under investigation. Furthermore, the current era of tumor genetics and molecular biology is challenging translational researchers to discover new, targeted, therapeutic agents. This review is an update on the recent advances in the understanding of meningiomas and their management, and highlights pertinent research questions to be addressed in the future.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.005

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 head0.219
GPT teacher head0.549
Teacher spread0.330 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations96
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Clinical OncologySame topicMeningioma and schwannoma managementFrench-language works237,207