MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2742101099 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.160816

Tenosynovial Giant Cell Tumor: Incidence, Prevalence, Patient Characteristics, and Recurrence. A Registry-based Cohort Study in Denmark

2017· article· en· W2742101099 on OpenAlex
Véra Ehrenstein, Søren Lindholt Andersen, Ibrahim Qazi, Neil Sankar, Alma B Pedersen, Robert Sikorski, John Acquavella

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal synovial abnormalities and treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIncidence (geometry)CohortEpidemiologyCohort studyInternal medicinePhysical therapySurgeryPediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Tenosynovial giant cell tumor (TGCT) is a rare benign proliferative and inflammatory disease arising from synovia of joints, bursae, or tendon sheaths. We aimed to estimate incidence rate and prevalence of TGCT in Denmark, to describe patient characteristics and treatment modalities among patients with TGCT, and to estimate risk of TGCT recurrence. METHODS: Using registry data on pathology examinations and inpatient and outpatient hospital diagnoses, we identified adult patients with diagnoses of diffuse TGCT (D-TGCT) or localized TGCT (L-TGCT) between 1997 and 2012, followed through 2012. We described patients' characteristics, treatment modalities, and recurrence. RESULTS: We identified 2087 patients with L-TGCT and 574 patients with D-TGCT. Their incidence rates per million person-years were 30.3 (95% CI 29.1-31.7) and 8.4 (95% CI 7.7-9.1), respectively. At the end of 2012, prevalence per 100,000 persons was 44.3 (95% CI 42.4-46.3) for L-TGCT and 11.5 (95% CI 10.6-12.6) for D-TGCT. Women made up 61% of the patients with L-TGCT and 51% of the patients with D-TGCT. Median age at diagnosis was 47 years. Ten-year risk of recurrence was 9.8% (95% CI 8.4-11.3%) after L-TGCT and 19.1% (95% CI 15.7-22.7%) after D-TGCT. CONCLUSION: This study contributes evidence about epidemiology of TGCT based on routinely collected population-based data gathered in a setting of universal equal access to healthcare and complete followup.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.435

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.253 · 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