MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Metastatic Basal Cell Carcinoma

2003· article· en· W2074215868 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

VenueDermatologic Surgery · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNonmelanoma Skin Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBasal cell carcinomaMalignancyMetastasisMedicinePathologyDiseaseCarcinomaBasal (medicine)Basal cellCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Basal cell carcinoma is the most common malignancy of humans. Although it is axiomatic that this tumor does not evolve into metastatic disease, such events rarely occur, and this possibility should not be overlooked. OBJECTIVES: The reader should better understand the sequence of events that resulted in metastatic disease and how these events are emblematic of the rare cases of basal cell carcinoma that systemically spread. METHODS: We present a case report of basal cell carcinoma that underwent distant metastasis. A short review of the literature is included. RESULTS: Although basal cell carcinoma is commonly considered a regional tumor with virtually no propensity for distant spread, this case reveals that metastatic disease does occur and with devastating results. CONCLUSION: Metastatic disease in basal cell carcinoma is a very rare but catastrophic consequence of this very common skin malignancy.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.628

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.222 · 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