Temporal trends in the intensity and duration of oncologic care among colorectal cancer (CRC) patients (pts).
Bibliographic record
Abstract
6552 Background: Substantial advances in therapy of CRC pts occurred between 2000 and 2012 contributing to a significant increase in overall survival. The objective of this study is to quantify the change in treatment (tx) intensity as measured by clinic and tx visits at a network of medical and radiation oncology clinics. Methods: Electronic scheduling records of stage I-IV CRC patients referred between 2000-2012 to the six oncology centers comprising the British Columbia Cancer Agency were reviewed and stratified by tx phases: I and II (adjuvant first 6 months, continued), III and IV (palliative first 6 months, continued), and V (last 6 months of life). Clinic Visit Intensity (CVI), Chemo Tx Intensity (CTI), number of chemo agents and number of cycles (CC), Radiotherapy (Rx) courses (RC) and fractions (RF) were measured, and trends by referral year were modelled using zero inflated negative binomial regression. Mean duration of visit for chemo tx (CHD) and clinic visits (CVD) were modelled using linear regression. Sex, age at diagnosis, stage, income, and community size were included in models if terms were significant. Results: 15,157 pts were included across 10 cohorts. CTI and CC increased significantly in tx phases II-V with later year of referral, while phase I results were stable or decreased, likely due to the substitution of oral for intravenous regimens. Rx increased only in advanced phases. Mean duration of scheduled time showed significant increases. Conclusions: CRC pts referred in 2012 vs 2000 receive significantly greater intensity and duration of care in tx phases II-V. Results have significant implications for resource allocation and the patient experience. [Table: see text]
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".