MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Current status of canine cancer registration – report from an international workshop

2011· article· en· W2003674640 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

VenueVeterinary and Comparative Oncology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVeterinary Oncology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNorwegianHarmonizationPopulationIdentification (biology)Coding (social sciences)MedicineCancerFamily medicineMedical physicsVeterinary medicineEnvironmental healthBiologyInternal medicineSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is a report from a workshop on canine cancer registration hosted at the Norwegian School of Veterinary Science in Oslo in August 2010. The aim is to present a summary of the current efforts to gather data on canine (and feline) cancer based on information from participants at the workshop. A definition and classification of cancer registries is provided together with an inventory of the databases presented. Particular focus is placed on the distinction between population-based and hospital-based cancer registries. Future challenges are discussed and issues relating to harmonization of diagnostic coding, defining the population-at-risk, individual animal identification and data quality are included. Finally, other groups working within the field of cancer registration in companion animals are encouraged to contact the authors for future collaboration.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.247
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.395
GPT teacher head0.513
Teacher spread0.119 · 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