MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2312228299 · doi:10.1097/ppo.0b013e3181f28b4d

Palliative Radiotherapy

2010· review· en· W2312228299 on OpenAlexaff
Stephen Lutz, Timothy Korytko, Janet Nguyen, Luluel Khan, Edward Chow, Benjamin W. Corn

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Cancer Journal · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicManagement of metastatic bone disease
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadiation therapyPalliative careMedicinePalliative treatmentMedical physicsIntensive care medicineNursingRadiologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Palliative radiotherapy has been prescribed since shortly after the discovery of the x-ray in the late 1800s, and it provides symptom relief that is successful, time-efficient, and cost-effective. Although palliative radiotherapy is worthwhile in a wide variety of clinical circumstances, there are situations where it is less worthwhile. We contrast the effective use of palliative radiotherapy with its ineffective use because of issues related to the patient, treatment, or health care system.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.007

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.348 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations44
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Cancer JournalSame topicManagement of metastatic bone diseaseFrench-language works237,207