MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2281601788

The Canadian Thyroid Cancer Consortium Registry development experience

2007· article· en· W2281601788 on OpenAlexaffabout
Albert A. Driedger, Mahmoud Badreddine, Loraine Warnock, Tom McDonald, Irina Rachinsky, Murali Rajarman, Cheryl Jefford, Andrée Boucher

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBiomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalNova Scotia Cancer CentreLondon Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceDatabaseIdentifierDocumentationWorld Wide WebAuditData dictionaryMetadataInformation retrieval
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1682 Objectives: To support assessment of short and long-term follow-up and documentation of outcomes of thyroid cancer care. We have developed and implemented a web-based registry, which consists of multiple identical site-specific databases for data collection and querying. Methods: The registry was developed using a LAMP software system. LAMP stands for Linux(OS), Apache(Web server), MySql(Database back-end) and PHP(scripting and interface language). A design of preliminary data input forms was conceived with core data elements and distributed to key practitioners for review. This design underwent many revisions to sort out ambiguities, remove redundancies and collect only relevant data, which is easily query-able. Input methods such as pull-down menus, check boxes and exclusive radio buttons were used accordingly based on the nature of data being collected. Although web-based, access privileges are set and each site can only add or edit within the scope of its assigned database in the registry. Each site9s database contains 39 tables and sub-tables inter-related with key, unique identifiers. Educational manuals were developed and distributed to participating sites with standardized definitions thus providing a common language for all institutions to ensure uniform data collection. Results: An external audit confirmed that the programming was robust. Institutional review boards have accepted that Canadian standards for patient confidentiality are met. Key strengths of the database include the multi-centre and potential international scope of the registry encompassing institutional and geographic diversity, large patient samples, potential amalgamation of data, security features and standardized data definitions. Audit standards to ensure integrity, accuracy and reliability of registry data are in development. Conclusions: This database will be a tool to facilitate multi-centre and international collaboration in the prospective evaluation of outcomes of thyroid cancer management.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.690
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBiomedical Text Mining and OntologiesFrench-language works237,207