MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2480165225 · doi:10.1097/ppo.0000000000000205

Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Spinal Metastases

2016· article· en· W2480165225 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Cancer Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicManagement of metastatic bone disease
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRadiation therapyRadiosurgeryAblative caseSurgeryRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spine metastases can be a debilitating and difficult therapeutic challenge for a significant number of cancer patients. Surgical management of spine metastases is often limited because of the complexity, risks, and recovery delays associated with open invasive surgical procedures. Conventional palliative external beam radiation therapy is the most common treatment modality. However, it is associated with limited palliative efficacy and local tumor control, including in the postoperative setting. In the era of improving systemic disease control, spine stereotactic body radiotherapy is fast emerging as the therapeutic modality of choice for selected de novo, postoperative, and salvage reirradiation spine metastases patients. Considerable expertise, multidisciplinary collaboration, and rigid adherence to quality metrics are required for the safe application of this highly conformal ablative therapy. This review highlights the current state of the evidence, understanding of the late effects, and technological requirements for spine stereotactic body radiotherapy specific to spinal metastases.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.658
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.325 · 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