MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115868890 · doi:10.1002/pbc.24386

The association between socioeconomic status and survival among children with Hodgkin and non‐Hodgkin lymphomas in a universal health care system

2012· article· en· W2115868890 on OpenAlexaffabout
Denise Darmawikarta, Jason D. Pole, Sumit Gupta, Paul C. Nathan, Mark Greenberg

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Blood & Cancer · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoPediatric Oncology Group
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSocioeconomic statusHodgkin lymphomaProportional hazards modelDiseaseLymphomaDemographyPopulationStage (stratigraphy)PediatricsPediatric cancerInternal medicineCancerGerontologyOncologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The association between socioeconomic status (SES) and cancer survival has been studied extensively in adults. However, little is known about this relationship in the pediatric population, specifically in jurisdictions with universal health care insurance programs. Our aim was to determine whether lower SES is associated with poorer survival in pediatric Hodgkin (HL) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) patients in Ontario. PROCEDURE: All incident cases of HL and NHL in children between 0 and 14 years old diagnosed in Ontario between January 1st, 1985 and December 31st, 2006 were identified through the Pediatric Oncology Group of Ontario Networked Information System. Neighborhood income quintile and material deprivation quintile at diagnosis were used as proxies for SES. Cox proportional hazards regressions were used to assess the association between SES and the risk of event-free or overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 692 patients were included in the analysis: 302 HL and 390 NHL. SES was not associated with survival (overall or event-free) among HL and NHL patients (P > 0.05 for all four comparisons, i.e., HL/NHL, EFS/OS) after adjustment for age, sex, period of diagnosis, and disease stage. There were no differences in the distribution of disease stage across SES strata at the time of diagnosis. Similarly, the distribution of deaths among long-term survivors (survived ≥5 years from diagnosis) did not differ across SES strata (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: SES was not associated with risk of death among pediatric HL and NHL patients in Ontario. This was consistent through the cancer trajectory, including diagnosis, treatment, and survivorship.

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)0.001
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 score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.895

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations40
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric Blood & CancerSame topicHealth disparities and outcomesFrench-language works237,207