MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2528163604 · doi:10.1016/j.cllc.2016.08.002

Canadian Phase III Randomized Trial of Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy Versus Conventionally Hypofractionated Radiotherapy for Stage I, Medically Inoperable Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer – Rationale and Protocol Design for the Ontario Clinical Oncology Group (OCOG)-LUSTRE Trial

2016· article· en· W2528163604 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Anand Swaminath, Marcin Wierzbicki, Sameer Parpia, James R. Wright, Theodoros Tsakiridis, Gordon Okawara, Vijayananda Kundapur, Alexis Bujold, Naseer Ahmed, Khalid Hirmiz, Elizabeth Kurien, Édith Filion, Zsolt Gabos, Sergio Faria, Alexander V. Louie, Timothy Owen, Elaine S. Wai, Kevin Ramchandar, Elisa Chan, Jim A. Julian, Kathryn Cline, Timothy J. Whelan

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Lung Cancer · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityNOSM UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaQueen's UniversityWestern UniversityMcGill University Health CentreUniversity of CalgaryCancerCare ManitobaWindsor Regional HospitalCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalHôpital Maisonneuve-RosemontUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of SaskatchewanOntario Clinical Oncology GroupSaint John Regional HospitalHôpital Notre-DameMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Cancer Society Research Institute
KeywordsMedicineStage (stratigraphy)Lung cancerRadiation therapyOncologyRandomized controlled trialClinical trialInternal medicineRadiologyMedical physics

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.727
Threshold uncertainty score0.542

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.002

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.463
Teacher spread0.375 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations46
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueClinical Lung CancerSame topicLung Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207