Management preferences following radical inguinal orchidectomy for Stage I testicular seminoma in Australasia
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A survey to evaluate the preferred patterns of management of Stage I seminoma was conducted during March 2001. The questionnaire was distributed by the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists to all qualified radiation oncologists, 74 out of 170 responded. All performed a staging CT scan of the abdomen and pelvis. Thoracic imaging consisted of either chest X-ray (29%) or chest CT (38%) while 33% performed both. Fifty-four percent of radiation oncologists discussed surveillance with their patients but estimated that 5% or less would choose this option. The most commonly prescribed dose was 25 Gy in 15 or 20 fractions (79%). Sixty-five percent of respondents treated the para-aortic (PA) nodes alone. Forty-two of 48 clinicians treating the PA field reported a change in practice after publication of the Medical Research Council study in 1999. Of these, 40 and 23% perform CT scans of the pelvis annually and every 6 months. Thirty-one percent did no follow-up CT scan. Compared to a similar survey from North America, we are more likely to use PA fields and less likely to discuss surveillance. As in the USA, and in contrast to Canada, few patients choose surveillance. There is no consensus regarding the frequency of follow-up scans in either North America or Australasia.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it