MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2511029024 · doi:10.1002/cncr.30132

Cancer patients with delirium in the emergency department: A frequent and distressing problem that calls for better assessment

2016· letter· en· W2511029024 on OpenAlexaff
Peter G. Lawlor

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer · 2016
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsCanadian Hospice Palliative Care AssociationOttawa HospitalBruyèreUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeliriumMedicineEmergency departmentDistressingDemographicsCancerIntensive care medicinePopulationMedical emergencyEmergency medicinePsychiatryInternal medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Delirium is acknowledged as a common complication of cancer that frequently results in a visit to the emergency department, yet it is often poorly assessed, and the diagnosis is missed as a result. Because age is a major risk factor for delirium and population demographics are changing, there is a critical need to develop optimal delirium screening strategies for cancer patients who access this point of care. See also pages 2918–24.

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)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0140.016
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.004

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 head0.309
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

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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations8
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancerSame topicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive DisordersFrench-language works237,207