MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2765093579 · doi:10.1136/bmjpo-2017-000082

Validation of a classification system for treatment-related mortality in children with cancer

2017· article· en· W2765093579 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hadeel Hassan, Menie Rompola, Adam Glaser, Sally E. Kinsey

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Paediatrics Open · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of LeedsNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsMedicineCause of deathAttributionDiseaseCohen's kappaPsychological interventionFamily medicinePediatricsEmergency medicineInternal medicinePsychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Death not directly due to cancer has been termed 'treatment-related mortality' (TRM). Appreciating the differences between TRM and disease-related death is critical in directing strategies to improve supportive care, interventions delivered or disease progression. Recently, a global collaboration developed and validated a consensus-based classification tool and attribution system. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the reliability of the newly developed consensus-based definition of TRM and explore the use of the cause-of-death attribution system outside the centre it was initially validated (Toronto, Canada). In the initial study, reviewers listed multiple causes of death. In this study, reviewers identified a primary cause for simplicity. SETTING: The paediatric haematology and oncology department at Leeds Teaching Hospital in Leeds, UK. PARTICIPANTS: Two consultants and two clinical research associates (CRAs). METHODS: Thirty medical records of the most recent deaths in children with cancer, 2 and 4 weeks prior to death, were anonymised and presented to the participants. Reviewers independently classified deaths as 'treatment related mortality' or 'not treatment related' according to the algorithm developed. When TRM occurred, reviewers applied the cause-of-death attribution system to identify the primary cause of death. Inter-relater reliability was assessed using the kappa statistic (k). MAIN OUTCOME: Inter-relater reliability between CRA and consultants. RESULTS: Reliability of the classification was deemed 'very good' between CRA and consultants (k=0.86, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.97). Ten deaths were classified as TRM, of which infection was the most frequent cause identified. Reviewers disagreed on the primary cause of death (eg, respiratory vs infection) when applying the cause-of-death attribution system in six cases and probable and possible causes in four cases. The study identified how the algorithm may not detect TRM in patients receiving non-curative therapy. CONCLUSIONS: The classification and cause of death attribution system could be implemented in different healthcare settings. Adaptation of the classification tool in patients receiving non-curative interventions and the cause of death attribution system should be considered.

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)0.173
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.357
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.827
Threshold uncertainty score0.916

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1730.357
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0120.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.315 · 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.

Study designObservational
DomainMethods
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

Citations9
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Paediatrics OpenSame topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207