MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2056849940 · doi:10.1097/lgt.0b013e31825f4b4f

Extramammary Paget Disease

2013· article· en· W2056849940 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

VenueJournal of Lower Genital Tract Disease · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer and Skin Lesions
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalUniversité de MontréalHôpital Saint-Luc
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGenitourinary systemRetrospective cohort studyMalignancyEpidemiologyVulvaExtramammary Paget's diseaseDiseasePaget DiseaseBreast cancerDermatologyCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to further characterize the epidemiology, clinical manifestations, pathology, immunopathology, outcome from therapy, and associated underlying malignancy in extramammary Paget disease (EMPD). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of patients treated for EMPD in our tertiary care center during a 23-year period ranging from 1985 to 2008. RESULTS: Sixty-four cases of EMPD were diagnosed during this period. Mean age at diagnosis was 66.8 years. Of the patients, 79.7% were female. Tumors were mostly localized on the vulvoperineal region. Associated cancers were found in 30% of the patients and included breast cancer and urogenital cancers. Of the patients, 42% had a least 1 recurrence. The risk of recurrence could only be associated to tumor location on the vulvoperineal region. The limitations of this study include its retrospective nature and sample size. CONCLUSIONS: Extramammary Paget disease is more commonly found on the vulva of older women and frequently recurs. Recurrence was not associated to margin status, which would support a more conservative therapeutic approach.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.536
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
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)0.0030.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.253 · 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