Genetic Services for Hereditary Breast/Ovarian and Colorectal Cancers – Physicians’ Awareness, Use and Satisfaction
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
OBJECTIVES: In 2000, the Ministry of Health in Ontario, Canada, introduced a publicly funded program to provide genetic services for hereditary breast/ovarian and colorectal cancers. We surveyed physicians to determine their awareness, use and satisfaction with this program. METHODS: A self-administered questionnaire was mailed to a random sample of 25% of Ontario family physicians and all gynecologists, oncologists (radiation, surgical and medical), gastroenterologists and general surgeons. RESULTS: Response rate was 49% (n = 1,427). Awareness of genetic testing for breast/ovarian cancer was high (91%) but less for colorectal cancer (60%). Use of services was associated with physician age of 40 or greater, urban location, confidence in knowledge of referral criteria and core competencies in genetics, and awareness of the program and where to refer. Almost half were dissatisfied with notification about the program. CONCLUSIONS: Ontario physicians are aware of cancer genetics services, and use is associated with increased knowledge of services, and confidence in skills. They would like more timely services and education about hereditary cancers and susceptibility testing.
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) | 0.000 | 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