High surgical volume is associated with a lower rate of secondary therapy after radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the relationship between surgical volume (SV), defined as the number of radical prostatectomies (RPs) within a calendar year, and the time to secondary therapy (ST) after RP, as this might represent an important determinant of cancer control. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study included 7937 men treated with RP by 130 urologists between 1989 and 2000. Radiotherapy or any form of hormonal manipulation represented ST. Univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses was used to evaluate the time to ST after RP. RESULTS: SV was an independent (P = 0.02) predictor of ST-free survival after RP, and the multivariable rate of ST sharply decreased with increasing SV. CONCLUSIONS: The use of ST is inversely proportional to SV of up to 24 RPs per year. A higher annual SV might be indicative of less restrictive use of RP in high-risk patients who eventually require combined treatments.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".