MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072064984 · doi:10.1097/pai.0b013e31819adacf

Implementation of a Canadian External Quality Assurance Program for Breast Cancer Biomarkers

2009· article· en· W2072064984 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jefferson Terry, Emina Torlakovic, J. R. Garratt, Denise Miller, Martin Köbel, Jesse Cooper, Shakir Bahzad, Dragana Pilavdzic, Frances P. O’Malley, Anne E. O'Brien, Sandip Sengupta, Edward Alport, Bernard Têtu, Bryan Knight, Norman M. Pettigrew, Richard Berendt, Robert Wolber, Martin J. Trotter, Robert H. Riddell, Louis Gaboury, Ford Elms, Anthony M. Magliocco, Penny J. Barnes, Allen M. Gown, C. Blake Gilks

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied immunohistochemistry & molecular morphology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityUniversity of TorontoJewish General HospitalRoyal University HospitalUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of British ColumbiaSaint John Regional HospitalVancouver General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality assuranceBreast cancerOncologyMedicineMedical physicsRisk analysis (engineering)Internal medicineCancerExternal quality assessmentPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Immunohistochemistry results for estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 are used to guide breast carcinoma patient management and it is essential to monitor these tests in external quality assurance (EQA) programs. Canadian Immunohistochemistry Quality Control is a web-based program with novel approach to EQA. Canadian Immunohistochemistry Quality Control RUN2 included tissue microarray slides with 38 samples tested by 18 immunohistochemical laboratories. Deidentified results were posted for viewing at www.ciqc.ca including all used protocols matched with scanned slides for virtual microscopy and garrattograms. Sensitivity, specificity, Kendall W test (concordance between laboratories), and kappa statistics (agreement with designated reference values) were calculated. Kappa values were within the target range (>0.8, or "near perfect" agreement) for 85% results. Kendall coefficient was 0.942 for estrogen receptor, 0.930 for progesterone receptor, and 0.958 for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2. The anonymous participation, quick feedback, and unrestricted full access in EQA results provides rapid insight into technical or interpretive deficiencies, allowing appropriate corrective action to be taken whereas the use of tissue microarrays enables meaningful statistical analysis.

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)0.039
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.047
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.339

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0390.047
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.007
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations34
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied immunohistochemistry & molecular morphologySame topicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207