MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150055221 · doi:10.1136/jms.7.3.152

Ten years of breast screening in the Screening Mammography Program of British Columbia, 1988–97

2000· article· en· W2150055221 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Screening · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMammographyBreast cancerBreast cancer screeningAsymptomaticPopulationOverdiagnosisCancerIncidence (geometry)ReferralConfidence intervalGynecologyMammography screeningDemographyObstetricsInternal medicineFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate 10 years outcomes of the Screening Mammography Program of British Columbia (SMPBC) and determine if breast screening targets were being achieved among women aged 40-80+ years. SETTING: Organised breast screening programme in British Columbia, Canada. METHODS: Rates of participation, abnormal referral, cancer detection, and interval cancer were calculated for asymptomatic women receiving an SMPBC mammography from 1988-97. RESULTS: 895,849 screening mammographies were provided to 335,433 women. 51.3% of women were age 50-69 years. Abnormalities were identified on 57,454 screens (6.4%) from which 3304 cancers were detected. Abnormal call rates were higher on first (9.8%), compared with subsequent screens (4.4%) and declined with age: 7.7% at age < 40 to 5.4% for age 70-79 years. Cancer detection rates were higher on first (5.0 per 1000) compared with subsequent screens (2.8 per 1000) and increased smoothly with age from 1.4 to 8.2 per 1000 from age < 40 to age 80 years and older. Twenty per cent of cancers were non-invasive. The median size of invasive cancers was 14 mm and 81% had no axillary lymph node metastases. The 12 month interval cancer rate was 0.6 per 1000 and did not vary significantly with age or screening history. The prevalence to expected incidence ratio was 3.1 for women age 50-79 years. CONCLUSION: Across a broad range of ages, surrogate indices of screening mammography success have been achieved in a population based, North American, organised breast cancer screening programme.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.757
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.283 · 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