Canadian guidelines for postoperative surveillance of upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Postoperative recurrences are common. The primary aims of postoperative surveillance for UTUC are to identify urothelial recurrences, de novo tumours of the urin-ary tract, and distant metastases at early stages when they may be amenable to treatment. The rarity of the disease, as well as the heterogeneity of treatments, complicates the task of developing a standard follow-up protocol. Multiple studies report on postoperative recurrence and prognosis for UTUC. By performing a systematic literature review, we generated an evidence-based consensus proto-col for the surveillance of patients after surgery for UTUC based on the predictors, timing and locations of recur -rences reported in the literature. The decision to provide neoadjuvant or adjuvant treatments is beyond the scope of this guideline and will not be reviewed. Wherever possible, the levels of evidence and grades of recommendation are noted using the modified Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine system.
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 | 0.009 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.004 |
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".