MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2413469016 · doi:10.1016/j.jgo.2016.04.007

Designing exercise clinical trials for older adults with cancer: Recommendations from 2015 Cancer and Aging Research Group NCI U13 Meeting

2016· review· en· W2413469016 on OpenAlexaff
Deepak Kilari, Enrique Soto‐Pérez‐de‐Celis, Supriya G. Mohile, Shabbir M.H. Alibhai, Carolyn J. Presley, Tanya M. Wildes, Heidi D. Klepin, Wendy Demark‐Wahnefried, A. Jatoi, Robert G. Harrison, Elizabeth Won, Karen M. Mustian

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geriatric Oncology · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersNational Cancer InstitutePatient-Centered Outcomes Research InstituteNational Institute on AgingAmerican Cancer Society
KeywordsMedicineCancerPsychological interventionQuality of life (healthcare)Clinical trialGerontologyPopulationCancer survivorGeriatric oncologyPhysical therapyInternal medicinePsychiatryEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.266
GPT teacher head0.555
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations81
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geriatric OncologySame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207