MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073111894 · doi:10.1002/jso.21225

Lymph node assessment and lymphadenectomy in prostate cancer

2009· review· en· W2073111894 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Ordon, Robert K. Nam

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Surgical Oncology · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProstate cancerProstatectomyLymphadenectomyLymph nodeLymphCancerMetastasisProstateOncologyUrologyInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The role of lymph node assessment for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer has significantly evolved over the last 20 years. The status of pelvic lymph nodes primarily served as a prognostic marker for prostate cancer. Improved methods in assessing the risk for cancer progression and metastasis have enhanced our ability to identify patients who require pelvic lymphadenectomy during radical prostatectomy. The status of pelvic lymph nodes is also being used to guide further treatments after surgery. Also, recent data has shown possible therapeutic benefit of lymphadenectomy in improving cancer specific survival.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.976
Threshold uncertainty score0.926

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.380 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations13
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Surgical OncologySame topicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207