MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2331267155 · doi:10.7314/apjcp.2016.17.1.65

Bioimpedence to Assess Breast Density as a Risk Factor for Breast Cancer in Adult Women and Adolescent Girls

2016· article· en· W2331267155 on OpenAlex
Gertraud Maskarinec, Yukiko Morimoto, Michelle B. Laguana, Rachel Novotny, Rachael T. Leon Guerrero

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDigital Radiography and Breast Imaging
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsBreast cancerMedicineMammographyDemographyBreast densityGynecologyCorrelationInternal medicineCancerMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although high mammographic density is one of the strongest predictors of breast cancer risk, X-ray based mammography cannot be performed before the recommended screening age, especially not in adolescents and young women. Therefore, new techniques for breast density measurement are of interest. In this pilot study in Guam and Hawaii, we evaluated a radiation-free, bioimpedance device called Electrical Breast DensitometerTM (EBD; senoSENSE Medical Systems, Inc., Ontario, Canada) for measuring breast density in 95 women aged 31-82 years and 41 girls aged 8-18 years. Percent density (PD) was estimated in the women's most recent mammogram using a computer-assisted method. Correlation coefficients and linear regression were applied for statistical analysis. In adult women, mean EBD and PD values of the left and right breasts were 230±52 and 226±50 Ω and 23.7±15.1 and 24.2±15.2%, respectively. The EBD measurements were inversely correlated with PD (rSpearman=-0.52, p<0.0001); the correlation was stronger in Caucasians (rSpearman=-0.70, p<0.0001) than Asians (rSpearman=-0.54, p<0.01) and Native Hawaiian/Chamorro/Pacific Islanders (rSpearman=-0.34, p=0.06). Using 4 categories of PD (<10, 10-25, 26-50, 51-75%), the respective mean EBD values were 256±32, 249±41, 202±46, and 178±43 Ω (p<0.0001). In girls, the mean EBD values in the left and right breast were 148±40 and 155±54 Ω; EBD values decreased from Tanner stages 1 to 4 (204±14, 154±79, 136±43, and 119±16 Ω for stages 1-4, respectively) but were higher at Tanner stage 5 (165±30 Ω). With further development, this bioimpedance method may allow for investigations of breast development among adolescent, as well as assessment of breast cancer risk early in life and in populations without access to mammography.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.676
Threshold uncertainty score0.478

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.289 · 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