Press Release: Smoking and Drinking Appear to Reverse Beta-Carotene's Anticancer Effect
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Patients who undergo surgery for rectal cancer at high-volume hospitals have better rates of survival and lower rates of permanent colostomy than patients who are operated on at low-volume hospitals, according to a study in the May 21 issue of the Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Hospital volume (i.e., the number of operations performed at a hospital) has been associated with outcomes after surgery for cancers of the pancreas, esophagus, prostate, breast, lung, and colon. However, the association between hospital volume and outcomes after rectal cancer surgery has been less clear. David C. Hodgson, M.D., of the Princess Margaret Hospital and the University of Toronto in Canada, John Z. Ayanian, M.D., of the Harvard Medical School in Boston, and their colleagues compared outcome measures among 7,257 patients who underwent surgery for rectal cancer. Hodgson and his colleagues found that patients treated at low-volume hospitals (those performing fewer than 7 rectal cancer operations per year) had a higher postoperative mortality rate (4.8% versus 1.6%) and lower 2-year survival rate (76.6% versus 83.7%) than patients treated at high-volume hospitals (those performing more than 20 operations per year).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.096 | 0.016 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".