MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065882889 · doi:10.1002/pbc.20099

Quality‐adjusted survival: A rigorous assessment of cure after cancer during childhood and adolescence

2004· review· en· W2065882889 on OpenAlexaff
Ronald D. Barr, Alessandra Sala

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Blood & Cancer · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityMcMaster Children's HospitalMcMaster University Medical Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLife expectancyQuality of life (healthcare)Childhood cancerCancerWeightingAdverse effectQuality-adjusted life yearPediatricsIntensive care medicineEnvironmental healthRisk analysis (engineering)Internal medicineCost effectiveness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Survivors of cancer in childhood and adolescence, while increasing gratifyingly in number with ever more effective therapy, have a life expectancy that is compromised all-too-often in both duration and value as a result of adverse treatment-related sequelae. Accounting for this burden of morbidity and mortality is essential for a proper appreciation of cure. Adjusting estimates of survival by measures of its quality affords a means of accomodating this requirement. It can be accomplished by "weighting" the length of survival according to preference-based assessments of health-related quality of life (HRQL), which allow the calculation of quality-adjusted life years. Inclusion of measures of HRQL in clinical trials is imperative as we reach to the ultimate objective; the truly cured child restored to normal health.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.347 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric Blood & CancerSame topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207