MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2137482496 · doi:10.2105/ajph.90.9.1466

Monitoring disease burden and preventive behavior with data linkage: cervical cancer among aboriginal people in Manitoba, Canada

2000· article· en· W2137482496 on OpenAlexafffundabout
T. Kue Young, Erich V. Kliewer, Janice Blanchard, Teresa Mayer

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Public Health · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersHealth Canada
KeywordsMedicinePapanicolaou stainCervical cancerPap testDemographyPopulationIncidence (geometry)Record linkageLinkage (software)DiseaseTest (biology)Public healthCancerFamily medicineGynecologyGerontologyEnvironmental healthCervical cancer screeningInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to estimate rates of cervical cancer and Papanicolaou testing among Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal women in Manitoba, Canada. METHODS: Data were derived through linking of administrative databases. RESULTS: In comparison with non-Aboriginal women, Aboriginal women had 1.8 and 3.6 times the age-standardized incidence rates of in situ and invasive cervical cancer, respectively. With the exception of those aged 15 to 19 years, Aboriginal women were less likely to have had at least 1 Papanicolaou test in the preceding 3 years. CONCLUSIONS: Data linkage provides a rapid and inexpensive means to estimate disease burden and preventive behavior in the absence of registries. There is an urgent need for an organized Papanicolaou test screening program in the Aboriginal population.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.090

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.332 · 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

Citations71
Published2000
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Public HealthSame topicCervical Cancer and HPV ResearchFrench-language works237,207