MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093058945 · doi:10.3747/co.20.1646

Colorectal Cancer Screening in Canada: Results from the First Round of Screening for Five Provincial Programs

2013· article· en· W2093058945 on OpenAlex
Diane Major, Heather Bryant, Martina Delaney, Stefanie Fekete, Laura Gentile, Marion Harrison, V. Mai, Erin G. Nicholson, Yhenneko J. Taylor

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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
Canadian institutionsSaskatchewan HealthCancer Care Nova ScotiaSaskatchewan Cancer AgencyHealth PEICancerCare ManitobaBC Cancer AgencyCanadian Partnership Against Cancer
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineColonoscopyColorectal cancerAdenomaMilestoneColorectal cancer screeningStage (stratigraphy)Internal medicineCancerGastroenterology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Early implementation of programmatic colorectal cancer (crc) screening for average-risk individuals 50-74 years of age in Canada has used fecal occult blood tests [fts (guaiac or immunochemical)] and colonoscopy for follow-up of abnormal fts. This paper presents results of an evaluation of this crc screening. METHODS: Five Canadian provincial programs provided aggregated data for individuals with a first-round ft processed between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2011. RESULTS: The 104,750 people who successfully completed a first round of screening represented 16.1% of those who had access to the programs between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2011 (mean age: 61.2 years; men: 61.4 years; women: 61.1 years). Of those participants, 4661 had an abnormal ft (4.4%). Uptake of colonoscopy within 180 days after an abnormal ft was 80.5%, ranging from 67.8% to 89.5% by program. The positive predictive value (ppv) for adenoma was 35.9% for guaiac ft and 50.6% for immunochemical ft. Adenoma and crc detection rates were, respectively, 16.9 and 1.8 per 1000 screened. Of invasive crcs detected, 64.6% were stage i or ii. CONCLUSIONS: Considering the variation in characteristics and stage of implementation of each provincial program, the collaboration of the provinces leading to this report on the early performance of crc screening in Canada is a major milestone. Targets are met or nearly met for significant indicators such as ppv for adenoma and cancer detection rate. Participation is expected to increase as programs are fully implemented in the provinces. Additional effort may be needed to improve timely access to follow-up colonoscopy.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.776
Threshold uncertainty score0.510

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.261 · 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