MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Examination of current Algoma District cancer program practices and local referral processes for patients with prostate cancer.

2016· article· en· W2590498238 on OpenAlexaffabout
Daniella Febbraro, Silvana Spadafora

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical practice guidelines implementation
Canadian institutionsGroup Health CentreEssar Steel Algoma (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineReferralProstate cancerCancerRadiation oncologistMedical recordFamily medicineInternal medicineGeneral surgeryRadiation therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

352 Background: The Algoma District Cancer Program (ADCP) is located in Sault Ste. Marie, ON, Canada and services the needs of the 125,000 individuals residing in the Algoma District, which has an area of approximately 49,000 square kilometres. Due to its geographic isolation in Northern Ontario, maintaining standards of care can be challenging to deliver. The objective of this project is to document any improvements in the referral process and treatment of patients with prostate cancer at the ADCP since the arrival of new medical oncologists in July 2013. Methods: Patients who had been seen by a medical oncologist at ADCP from July 2013 to July 2015 were included in this study. Patient charts were analyzed in order to gather information including date of diagnosis, stage at time of referral, date of consult with medical oncologist, previous treatments trialed, and dates of treatment. Patients were divided into two groups, diagnosed prior to 2014 and after 2014, to examine progress at ADCP. Results: From July 2013 to July 2015, there were 73 patients seen by a medical oncologist at ADCP with a diagnosis of prostate cancer. Of these patients, 54 were diagnosed prior to 2014 and 19 were diagnosed after 2014. For all patients diagnosed prior to 2014, the average number of years from diagnosis to a medical oncology consult was 5.24 years, with the longest being 19 years for two patients. In comparison, for all patients diagnosed after 2014, a medical oncologist saw them only 0.26 years on average after they were diagnosed. Since 2014, lines of therapy administered after referral to medical oncology have become greater than before 2014. Specifically for stage IV prostate cancer patients, the average number of lines of therapy ordered by a medical oncologist has increased for patients diagnosed after 2014. Conclusions: Since the arrival of new medical oncologists at ADCP in July 2013, the average number of years after diagnosis that a patient is referred to the clinic has decreased, while the average lines of therapies utilized after their consult with a medical oncologist has increased, showing an improvement in both referral processes and adherence to standard guidelines in the treatment of prostate cancer patients.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.717
Threshold uncertainty score0.563

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.421
GPT teacher head0.627
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicClinical practice guidelines implementation→French-language works237,207→