MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153182506 · doi:10.3138/cbmh.20.2.251

Cancer: “The Worst Scourge of Civilized Mankind”

2003· article· fr· W2153182506 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Charles Hayter

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Health History · 2003
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicGlobal Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceGynecologyMedicineArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le cancer est actuellement la seconde cause principale de mortalité dans les pays développés et parmi les trois causes les plus importantes de décès chez les adultes dans les pays en voie de développement. Selon la plus récente prévision (avril 2003) de l’Organisation Mondiale de la Santé, le taux global de cancer augmentera de 50%, pour passer de 10 millions en 2000 à 15 millions en 2020. Au début de ce siècle, le cancer est prévu devenir la première cause de mortalité au Canada et aux États-Unis. Parmi les facteurs responsables de cette tendance figurent le vieillissement de la population, la prévalence du tabac et l’adoption de styles de vie malsains (ex: la diète occidentale) dans les pays en voie de développement. Depuis les années 1930, la plupart des provinces canadiennes ont fondé des organismes gouvernementaux consacrés à la prévention, au diagnostic et au traitement du cancer. Bien que les programmes de contrôle du cancer varient, des composantes similaires s’y retrouvent: programme d’éducation publique visant la prévention et le diagnostic précoce; triage des patients à hauts risques; aménagements centralisés (cliniques du cancer) pour l’évaluation et le traitement; et recherches dans la biologie et le traitement du cancer chez l’humain.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.009
Scholarly communication0.0090.005
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.004

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations11
Published2003
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Health HistorySame topicGlobal Public Health Policies and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207