Access to Oncology Consultation in a Cancer Cohort in Northeastern Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To enhance cancer symptom management for residents of Sudbury-Manitoulin District, an ambulatory palliative clinic (pac) was established at the Northeast Cancer Centre of Health Sciences North. The pac is accessed from a medical or radiation oncology consultation. The primary purpose of the present population-based retrospective study was to estimate the percentage of cancer patients who died without ever having a medical or radiation oncology consultation. A secondary purpose was to determine factors associated with never having received one of those specialized consultations. METHODS: Administrative data was obtained through the Ontario Cancer Data Linkage Project. For each index case, we constructed a timeline, in days, of all Ontario Health Insurance Plan billing codes and associated service dates starting with the primary cancer diagnosis and ending with death. RESULTS: Within the 5-year study period (2004-2008), 6683 people in the area of interest with a valid record of primary cancer diagnosis died from any cause. Most (n = 5988, 89.6%) had 1 primary cancer diagnosis. For that subgroup, excluding those with a disease duration of 0 days (n = 67), about 18.4% (n = 1088) never had a consultation with a medical or radiation oncologist throughout their disease trajectory. Patients who were older or who resided in a rural area were significantly less likely to have had a consultation. CONCLUSIONS: Specific strategies directed toward older and rural patients might help to address this important access-to-care issue.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".