MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Poorly differentiated tumours of the anal canal: a diagnostic strategy for the surgical pathologist

2006· review· en· W2053130959 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

VenueHistopathology · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal and Anal Carcinomas
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPathologyAdenocarcinomaNeuroendocrine differentiationDifferential diagnosisMedicineCarcinomaAnal canalNeuroendocrine carcinomaLymphomaBasal cellSurgical pathologyCancerInternal medicineRectum

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Poorly differentiated malignancies affecting the anal canal are uncommon but pose diagnostic difficulties because of the wide range of normal cell types that may occur within a limited anatomical region. The range of lesions that may present as poorly differentiated tumours includes squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma, small and large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma, neuroendocrine carcinoma expressing epithelial cytokeratins and other patterns of mixed differentiation, undifferentiated carcinoma, malignant melanoma, lymphoma and secondary tumours. This review discusses the differential diagnosis of these neoplasms with the aid of short illustrative case studies.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.904
Threshold uncertainty score0.784

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.266 · 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