MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029669980 · doi:10.1358/dot.2009.45.1.1315920

Strategies to preserve prostate health

2009· review· en· W2029669980 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

VenueDrugs of today · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProstate cancerProstatitisProstate DiseasesClinical trialProstateEtiologyProstate diseaseIntensive care medicineBioinformaticsCancerPathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present review addresses strategies to preserve prostate health, tackling the three most common prostatic problems with which men present to physicians, namely, prostate hypertrophy, prostatitis and prostate cancer. Unfortunately since a clear etiology does not exist for each of these problems, we have to rely on experimental research, epidemiologic and clinical data to design prevention strategies. A number of modifiable targets have been identified and some are cross-shared between these three very prevalent entities. However, since the pathogenesis of each condition seems multifactorial, and the interconnections between them inadequately understood, chemopreventive strategies are still in their infancy even after very large clinical trials -which produced often more questions than they delivered answers- have already been performed.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.347 · 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