MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004990944 · doi:10.1016/s0022-5347(05)00070-4

Effect of Preoperative Delay on Survival in Patients With Bladder Cancer Undergoing Cystectomy in Quebec: A Population Based Study

2005· article· en· W2004990944 on OpenAlexaffabout
Salaheddin M. Mahmud, Brian C. Fong, Nader Fahmy, Simon Tanguay, Armen Aprikian

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Urology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCystectomyBladder cancerUrologyPopulationCancerOncologySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: In Canada there is growing concern that waiting time for cancer surgery has been increasing. We used population based data to estimate the average PD for RC in Quebec and assess whether delayed surgery has a negative impact on long-term survival. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used the provincial billing database of the maladie du Quebec to identify all patients with bladder cancer 18 years or older who underwent RAMQ from 1990 to 2002. PD was calculated as the time elapsed between the most recent transurethral resection and the date of RC. Patients were categorized according to PD tertiles into 3 groups, namely 1) 20 or less, 2) 21 to 47 and (C) 48 days or greater. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess the effect of PD on overall survival, while adjusting for patient and provider factors. RESULTS: During the study period 1,592 radical cystectomies were performed. Overall median PD was 33 days (95% CI 30 to 35). Median PD increased from 23 days in 1990 to 50 in 2002. After adjusting for calendar year, and patient and provider variables there were no significant differences in survival among the 3 delay categories. However, patients subject to greater than 12 weeks of delay were at 20% greater risk for dying (95% CI 1.0 to 1.5, p = 0.051). CONCLUSIONS: In line with previous reports PD greater than 12 weeks seems to be associated with a worse long-term prognosis.

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 score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.965

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations91
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of UrologySame topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207