Variation in the use of palliative radiotherapy at end of life: Examining demographic, clinical, health service, and geographic factors in a population-based study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Palliative radiotherapy (PRT) can improve quality of life for people dying of cancer. Variation in the delivery of PRT by factors unrelated to need may indicate that not all patients who may benefit from PRT receive it. In this study, 13,494 adults who died of cancer between 2000 and 2005 in Nova Scotia, Canada, were linked to radiotherapy records. Multivariate logistic regression was used to examine the relationships among demographic, clinical, service, and geographic variables, and PRT consultation and treatment. Among the decedents, 4188 (31.0%) received PRT consultation and 3032 (22.3%) treatment. PRT declined with increased travel time and community deprivation. Females, older persons, and nursing home residents also had lower PRT rates. Variations were observed by cancer site and previous oncology care. Variations in PRT use should be discussed with referring physicians, and improved means of access to PRT considered. Benchmarks for optimal rates of PRT are needed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".