An investigation of cancer incidence in a First Nations community in Alberta, Canada, 1995–2006
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine colorectal and overall cancer incidence as part of a three-pronged investigation in response to the concerns of a First Nations community in Alberta, Canada, located close to sulfur-rich natural gas installations, and to determine whether the incidence of cancers observed in this reserve was higher than expected. METHODS: A population dataset with information identifying First Nations status and band affiliation was linked to the Alberta Cancer Registry to determine cancer incidence cases between 1995 and 2006 for on- and off-reserve study populations. Using indirect standardized incidence ratios, observed cancer incidence cases for the study populations were compared with cases expected based on three separate reference populations. RESULTS: Observed colorectal and overall cancer incidence cases within the First Nations community were not higher than expected. Cervical cancer incidence cases, however, were higher than expected for on- and off-reserve populations; public health measures designed to address this risk have been implemented and on-going surveillance of cancer incidence in the community will be maintained.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".