MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2577732863 · doi:10.21037/apm.2016.11.03

Collaboration between primary care physicians and radiation oncologists

2017· review· en· W2577732863 on OpenAlexaff
Elizabeth Barnes, Edward Chow, Cyril Danjoux, May Tsao

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Palliative Medicine · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvances in Oncology and Radiotherapy
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSurvivorship curvePrimary carePalliative carePrimary care physicianCancer survivorshipCurative carePatient careMEDLINERadiation oncologyCancerHealth careFamily medicineIntensive care medicineNursingRadiation therapyAmbulatory careInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Communication between physicians is required to ensure important patient information is relayed during the workup, treatment, follow-up and subsequent transition of care back to the primary care physician (PCP). In this review we discuss how survivorship care is being increasingly recognized as an important component of the patient's cancer journey, and one often provided by the PCP. Palliative care and symptom control for patients with non-curable malignancy is often provided by the PCP during and after cancer treatment. Physician communication is paramount to ensure optimal patient care.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.202
GPT teacher head0.547
Teacher spread0.345 · 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.

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

Citations11
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Palliative MedicineSame topicAdvances in Oncology and RadiotherapyFrench-language works237,207