MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139788749 · doi:10.3109/13816810.2014.937543

Enucleation Refusal for Retinoblastoma: A Global Study

2014· article· en· W2139788749 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueOphthalmic Genetics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicOcular Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRetinoblastomaEnucleationMedicineEye EnucleationOphthalmologySurgeryBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Enucleation (eye removal) is often the only curative treatment for the childhood eye cancer retinoblastoma, yet parental refusal of enucleation commonly contributes to treatment delay and poor survival globally. METHODS: Physicians who treat retinoblastoma were surveyed to glean underlying reasons for treatment refusal. RESULTS: Refusal rates were higher when less time was spent with parents explaining retinoblastoma/enucleation, and where fewer support services were available. Reasons for refusal included parental belief in alternative treatments, culture, and social stigma. CONCLUSIONS: We suggest strategies to increase parental compliance with enucleation and save the lives of children with retinoblastoma.

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.

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)0.000
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 score0.276
Threshold uncertainty score0.587

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.271 · 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