MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110770280 · doi:10.7759/cureus.157

Access to Stereotactic radiosurgery : Identification of Existing Disparities and a Modest Proposal to Reduce Them

2014· article· en· W2110770280 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Francis Fezeu, Ahmed J. Awad, Colin J. Przybylowski, Robert M. Starke, Yuval Grober, David Schlesinger, Cheng-chia Lee, Zhiyuan Xu, Jason P. Sheehan

Bibliographic record

VenueCureus · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Dose and Imaging
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadiosurgeryMedicinePer capitaGamma knifeGross domestic productHealth careUnit (ring theory)ChinaEuropean unionLatin AmericansSocioeconomicsEconomic growthGeographyEnvironmental healthBusinessSurgeryInternational tradePolitical sciencePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Despite the abundance of literature demonstrating the safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of radiosurgery, access to radiosurgery in some parts of the world remains limited. The purpose of this report is to identify disparities for stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and suggest possible solutions. Methods In this study, we only focus on one SRS device (Gamma Knife) for SRS availability and cost data. We utilized information from Elekta AB to identify Gamma Knife device sales and the records of the World Bank in order to calculate the ratio of Gamma Knife devices per capita. According to evidence-based data of medical oncology in the United States of America (USA), we assumed that 18% of gross domestic product (GDP) goes to healthcare spending, approximately 5% of healthcare spending goes to cancer care, and up to 30% of cancer care could be spent on radiosurgery. Results As of 2013, one Gamma Knife unit is available for approximately three million people in USA, Canada, Japan, and the Republic of Korea. In contrast, there is one Gamma Knife unit for 370 million people in Africa, 90 million people in China, 47 million people in Central and Latin America, 43 million people in Asia (excluding China, Japan, and the Republic of Korea), 36 million people in Australia, and 15 million people in Europe. According to their respective GDPs, these regions can afford to purchase the following numbers of Gamma Knife devices, respectively (assuming a unit cost of $4 million): European Union - 11,225, USA - 9,400, East Asia and Pacific region - 7,054, Latin America and Caribbean - 3,600, Middle East and North Africa - 1,039, and sub-Saharan Africa - 869. Regional medical policies in West Africa, South Africa, and East Africa could have a significant beneficial effect by making radiosurgery accessible to people in these resource-limited regions. Conclusions Stereotactic devices per patient population ratios and GKRS device cost relative to GDP vary tremendously. These factors likely affect patient access to stereotactic radiosurgery. Collaboration of regional medical groups, institutions providing radiosurgical care, and both government and non-governmental organizations could help reduce these limitations to care and improve access to SRS, particularly in resource constrained countries.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.275 · 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.

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

Citations10
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCureusSame topicRadiation Dose and ImagingFrench-language works237,207