MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2121708973 · doi:10.1200/jco.2004.09.059

Pooled Analysis of Fluorouracil-Based Adjuvant Therapy for Stage II and III Colon Cancer: Who Benefits and by How Much?

2004· article· en· W2121708973 on OpenAlexaff
Sharlene Gill, Charles L. Loprinzi, Daniel J. Sargent, Stephan D. Thomé, Steven R. Alberts, Daniel G. Haller, Jacqueline Benedetti, Guido Francini, Lois E. Shepherd, Jean François Seitz, Roberto Labianca, Wei Chen, Michael P. Heldebrant, Richard M. Goldberg

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsMedicineStage (stratigraphy)Adjuvant therapyInternal medicineProportional hazards modelColorectal cancerLevamisoleMultivariate analysisOncologyAdjuvantSurvival analysisCancerRadiation therapySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OpenAlex records an abstract for this work, but it could not be fetched just now.

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)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.120

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.018
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.350 · 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 designMeta-analysis
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

Citations1,015
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicColorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments→French-language works237,207→