Bibliographic record
Abstract
Update has been held annually since 1993 to give practicing urologists and urology residents and fellows a review of current knowledge, presentations of new ideas, and interpretations of controversies to help facilitate management of clinical problems.This year was no exception, with many new developments in diverse areas of urology covered at the update.Prostate cancer (PCa) screening has been particularly controversial, as many Canadian urologists, individually and collectively through the Canadian Urological Association (CUA), voiced their concerns over the latest recommendations of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (CTFPHC).Apart from Dr. Anthony Miller, who defended the recommendations against prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening, the other speakers presented information that calls into question the process and conclusions of the task force.Dr. H. Ballentine Carter underscored the importance of detecting and treating high-risk PCa; this led into a session on the use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for PCa diagnosis and staging.MRI is currently being evaluated as a screening tool, and preliminary evidence indicates that it may identify clinically significant cancers.It has also been reported to be useful in directing ultrasound (US)-guided biopsies to specific regions of the prostate, with the use of an image fusion device that fuses MRI data with real-time US imaging.Factors associated with PCa incidence and progression were discussed.Diet-induced hyperinsulinemia has been experimentally shown to be associated with accelerated growth of PCa cell (LNCaP) xenografts.The commonly used antidiabetic drug, metformin, may influence cancer cells indirectly by decreasing insulin levels or directly by influencing cancer cell proliferation and apoptosis.1 New data were presented from a single-armed pilot study on the neoadjuvant use of metformin prior to radical prostatectomy.Other factors in the disease may be male-pattern baldness and prostate inflammation.Dr. Anthony Burnett reviewed penile rehabilitation following nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.038 | 0.012 |
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".