MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Twenty-year trends of primary liver cancer incidence rates in an urban Chinese population

2003· article· en· W2333668835 on OpenAlexaff
X. Hao, Peter Wang, Kexin Chen, Li Q, Ming He, Shun Yu, Zhenlang Guo, Anthony V. Perruccio, Tomáš Rohan

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Cancer Prevention · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkToronto Western Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoisson regressionIncidence (geometry)DemographyMedicineEpidemiologyCancer registryPopulationCancerAge groupsInternal medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study was to describe trends in the incidence rates of primary liver cancer in a geographically defined Chinese population. Primary liver cancer cases (N=13 685) were diagnosed between 1981 and 2000 and identified by the Tianjin Cancer Registry. Age-adjusted and age-specific incidence rates were examined in both males and females. Poisson regression was employed to assess the incidence rate trends. Crude and age-adjusted incidence rates in the study period were: 27.4/100 000 and 16.4/100 000 in males and 11.5/100 000 and 6.4/100 000 in females, respectively. While the results from Poisson regression analyses suggest statistically significant trends of declining incidence rates of primary liver cancer overall, trends were not consistent across age and sex groups. The decline in incidence was observed, for the most part, in the 40-69 age group, with a greater decrease in males. Our findings provide a new evidence of a downward trend in incidence rates of this disease in China for a period of 20 years. As the observed decline is relatively small and inconsistent across sex and age groups, a continued epidemiological observation on this condition is required.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.083

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations35
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Cancer PreventionSame topicLiver Disease Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207