MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2763780449 · doi:10.1089/thy.2017.0280

Pathologic Reporting of Tall-Cell Variant of Papillary Thyroid Cancer: Have We Reached a Consensus?

2017· article· en· W2763780449 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThyroid · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThyroid Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsSinai Health System
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePapillary thyroid cancerThyroid cancerThyroid carcinomaThyroidRadiologyPathologyGeneral surgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Tall-cell variant (TCV) is widely believed to be a more aggressive subtype of papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC). Despite the significance of TCV with respect to risk stratification and therapeutic decision making, its diagnosis is subject to inter-observer variability. This study aimed to determine the level of agreement among expert pathologists in the identification and reporting of TCV. METHODS: Seventeen surgical resections for thyroid cancer containing the diagnostic term "tall cell" in their pathology reports and 22 cases diagnosed as classical PTC were selected. Cases were digitalized, and 14 expert pathologists reviewed the scanned slides blinded to the original interpretation. Each pathologist designated each case as TCV or not and answered multiple questions about diagnostic histopathologic features of TCV. RESULTS: The overall strength of agreement for identifying TCV was fair (Fleiss kappa 0.34), and the proportion of observed agreement was 0.70. Of 22 cases originally diagnosed as PTC classical variant, 15 (68%) were reclassified as TCV by at least one expert pathologist. It was noted that four different definitions for TCV were used by the participants based on various combinations of cell height to width (H:W) ratio and the percentage of tumor cells showing that specific ratio. All pathologists agreed that the diagnosis of TCV does not rely solely on a specific H:W ratio. CONCLUSIONS: Pathologic reporting of TCV varies among pathologists. This disagreement is a result of the lack of unanimous diagnostic criteria and variation in individual pathologists' interpretations. These discrepancies lead to over- and under-diagnosis of TCV, which has significant implications in patient management. It is imperative to understand this variability in diagnosis TCV as it relates to risk stratification and interpretation of clinical studies related to this histologic subtype of PTC. Further studies are needed to reach consensus on the diagnostic criteria of TCV.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.933

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.277 · 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