MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2082239444 · doi:10.1002/cncr.26058

Research challenges in adolescent and young adult cancer survivor research

2011· article· en· W2082239444 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Emily S. Tonorezos, Kevin C. Oeffinger

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineCancerQuality of life (healthcare)Young adultPopulationGerontologyAgency (philosophy)Cancer survivorFamily medicineEnvironmental healthInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Every year in Canada and the United States, about 26,000 adolescent and young adults (AYA) between ages 15 and 29 years are diagnosed with cancer. Although the majority of AYA cancer patients will survive their primary cancer, many will develop serious health problems or die prematurely secondary to their curative cancer therapy. Much is known about the long-term health outcomes after adolescent cancer. In contrast, there remain substantial gaps in our understanding of the long-term outcomes after most young adult cancers. To optimize the health and quality of life of AYA cancer survivors and improve upon curative cancer therapy, it is essential to further investigate the long-term outcomes of this population. Before embarking upon this endeavor, it is important for the investigator and the funding agency to be cognizant about some of the unique challenges in research of AYA cancer survivors. To this end, the authors present a brief overview of some of the key research challenges, discuss the strengths and limitations of using available AYA cohorts and databases, and highlight potential future directions.

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)0.004
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 score0.170
Threshold uncertainty score0.930

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.455
GPT teacher head0.486
Teacher spread0.031 · 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 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

Citations48
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancerSame topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207