MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2586176547 · doi:10.9778/cmajo.20160100

Diagnostic and referral intervals for Manitoba women with epithelial ovarian cancer - the Manitoba Ovarian Cancer Outcomes (MOCO) study group: a retrospective cross-sectional study

2017· article· en· W2586176547 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Allison J. Love, Pascal Lambert, Donna Turner, Robert Lotocki, Erin Dean, Shaundra Popowich, Alon D. Altman, Mark W. Nachtigal

Bibliographic record

VenueCMAJ Open · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaResearch Institute in Oncology and HematologyCancerCare Manitoba
FundersCancerCare Manitoba Foundation
KeywordsMedicineEmergency departmentReferralRetrospective cohort studyOvarian cancerMedical recordOdds ratioConfidence intervalCancerStage (stratigraphy)CohortInternal medicinePediatricsGynecologyFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>Background:</h3> Epithelial ovarian cancer has the highest mortality of all gynecologic cancers. The poor survival rates are often attributed to the advanced stage at which most of these cancers are detected. We sought to examine the effects of patient demographics, comorbidities and presenting symptoms on diagnostic and referral intervals by location of first presentation (emergency department v. elsewhere) and to identify factors that affect these intervals. <h3>Methods:</h3> We performed a retrospective analysis of chart and medical record data for ovarian cancers, with the exceptions of sex cord and germ cell tumours, diagnosed between 2004 and 2010 in Manitoba, Canada. Data were collected on baseline characteristics, time to diagnosis and referral, number and type of physician visits and emergency department visits. <h3>Results:</h3> The final cohort consisted of 601 patients. Sixty-three percent of patients received their diagnosis within 60 days of initial presentation, and 75.2% had their cancer diagnosed within 2 physician encounters. The median diagnostic interval for all stages of patients presenting to the emergency department was 7 days, compared with 55 days for patients presenting elsewhere. Early stage patients not presenting to the emergency department had their diagnosis a median of 34.0 days later than patients with advanced disease (95% confidence interval [CI] 22.22 to 45.69, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.0001). The presence of some symptoms was associated with shortened diagnostic intervals. Patients with serous, clear-cell or endometrioid histotypes were less likely to have first presentation beginning in the emergency department (odds ratio [OR] 0.40, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.64, <i>p</i> = 0.0001; OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.59, <i>p</i> = 0.007) than those with unclassified epithelial histotype. <h3>Interpretation:</h3> For this group of patients, the main factor associated with diagnostic and referral intervals is presentation to the emergency department. These patients likely required more urgent attention for their more symptomatic disease, leading to quicker diagnosis and referral patterns, despite poorer prognosis.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCMAJ OpenSame topicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207