MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013023214 · doi:10.2310/7070.2002.10836

Retrospective Study of the Progression of Oral Premalignant Lesions to Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A South Wales Experience

2002· article· en· W2013023214 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Matthew Bromwich

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Otolaryngology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicOral Health Pathology and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLeukoplakiaMalignancyOral lichen planusIncidence (geometry)DermatologyBiopsyCancerBasal cellCarcinomaPopulationVerrucous carcinomaPathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The premalignant potential of leukoplakia is controversial. This study is intended to determine whether chronic oral "white lesions" demonstrated premalignant potential by investigating the population presented to the University Hospital of Wales in Cardiff between January 1996 and June 2000. Patient demographics are presented. During this period, 510 biopsies were performed on suspicious white lesions and 311 cases of oral cancer were diagnosed. During the same period, 11 of the 311 patients developed malignancy despite initial benign diagnosis. Thirty-four of the 510 biopsies were initially diagnosed as oral lichen planus (OLP), whereas 3 of the previously mentioned 11 were diagnosed as OLP and later developed squamous cell carcinoma. This represents an incidence of detected premalignancy in 3.5% of oral cancer cases. On re-examination of the initial biopsy specimens, these 3 cases met criteria for OLP in some areas, whereas the others appeared hyperkeratotic. These specimens may represent a subtype of premalignant chronic white lesions rather than exemplify the premalignant potential of OLP. Further direction of research will be discussed.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.321
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations9
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of OtolaryngologySame topicOral Health Pathology and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207