Screening decreases prostate cancer mortality: 11‐year follow‐up of the 1988 Quebec prospective randomized controlled trial
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This clinical trial is aimed at evaluating the impact of prostate cancer screening on cancer-specific mortality. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Forty-six thousand four hundred and eighty-six (46,486) men aged 45-80 years registered in the electoral roll of the Quebec city area were randomized in 1988 between screening and no screening. Screening included measurement of serum prostatic specific antigen (PSA) using 3.0 ng/ml as upper limit of normal and digital rectal examination (DRE) at first visit. At follow-up visits, serum PSA only was used. RESULTS: Seventy-four (74) deaths from prostate cancer occurred in the 14,231 unscreened controls while 10 deaths were observed in the screened group of 7,348 men during the first 11 years following randomization. Median follow-up of screened men was 7.93 years. A Cox proportional hazards model of the age at death from prostate cancer shows a 62% reduction (P < 0.002, Fisher's exact test) of cause-specific mortality in the screened men (P = 0.005). These results are in agreement with the continuous decrease of prostate cancer mortality observed in North America.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it