MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077506728 · doi:10.1177/1740774510374091

Assessing contamination and compliance in the prostate component of the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial

2010· article· en· W2077506728 on OpenAlexaff
Paul F. Pinsky, Amanda Black, Barnett S. Kramer, Anthony B. Miller, Philip C. Prorok, Christine D. Berg

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Trials · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProstateProstate cancerProstate cancer screeningIncidence (geometry)Prostate-specific antigenInternal medicineOncologyCancer screeningGynecologyEpidemiologyRectal examinationCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Recently, the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial published 7-year complete prostate cancer mortality results, which showed no benefit of screening with prostate specific antigen (PSA) and digital rectal examination (DRE). An issue of concern was the substantial level of 'contamination', or use of PSA and DRE in control arm men. PURPOSE: To provide a detailed description of contamination in PLCO. METHODS: Surveys inquiring about the most recent PSA and DRE use were given to a sample of control arm men throughout the screening phase of PLCO (years 0-5). A probability model was utilized to translate survey results into actual frequency counts of tests. To assess the impact of contamination, Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End RESULTS: (SEER) incidence rates from the pre-screening era (1985-1987) as well as contemporaneous rates, were applied to PLCO person-years of observation. Results Of 38,350 control arm men, 2427 were surveyed. Pre-trial screening and college education were statistically significantly associated with increased contamination rates. The estimated mean number of screening PSAs (DREs) in the control arm was 2.7 (1.1); this compares to 5.0 (3.5) in the screened arm. 1984 and 2538 prostate cancers were observed in the control and screened arms, respectively, during the screening phase. In the absence of screening, 960 and 949 would have been expected; with contemporaneous incidence rates, 1630 and 1611 were expected. LIMITATIONS: Due to the limitations of the surveys, in terms of both reach and scope, the exact level of PSA and DRE use in control arm men cannot be known. CONCLUSIONS: Use of prostate screening by control arm men was substantial, but also substantially less than in screened arm men. Detailed quantitative analyses of screening use across arms are critical for understanding current and future findings from the prostate component of PLCO.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.276
GPT teacher head0.511
Teacher spread0.235 · 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.

Study designObservational
DomainMethods
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

Citations141
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical TrialsSame topicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207