Minority recruitment to the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous large chemoprevention studies have not recruited significant numbers of minorities. The Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT) is a large phase III study evaluating the impact of selenium and vitamin E on the clinical incidence of prostate cancer. Over 400 SELECT study sites in the USA, Canada, and Puerto Rico recruited men to this trial. The SELECT recruitment goal was 24% minorities, with 20% black, 3% Hispanic, and 1% Asian participants. The goal for black participants was set at 20% because of their proportion in the United States population and their prevalence of prostate cancer. METHODS: The minority recruitment strategies in SELECT were to: 1) consider minority recruitment during site selection; 2) expand the eligibility criteria by lowering the age criterion for black men and including men with controlled co-morbid illnesses; 3) develop a national infrastructure; 4) give additional funds to sites with the potential to increase black enrollment; and 5) provide resources to maximize free media opportunities to promote SELECT. RESULTS: SELECT recruitment began in August 2001 and was intended to last five years, but concluded two years ahead of schedule in June 2004. Of the 35 534 participants enrolled, 21% were minorities, with 15% black, 5% Hispanic, and 1% Asian. CONCLUSIONS: Careful planning, recruitment of large numbers of clinical centers and adequate resources accomplished by the combined efforts of the National Cancer Institute (NCI), Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG), SELECT Recruitment and Adherence Committee (RAC), SELECT Minority and Medically Underserved Subcommittee (MMUS), and the local SELECT sites resulted in attainment of the estimated sample size ahead of schedule and recruitment of the largest percentage of black participants ever randomized to a cancer prevention trial.
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 | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".