MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2772391813 · doi:10.9778/cmajo.20170005

Follow-up imaging after nephrectomy for cancer in Canada: urologists' compliance with guidelines. An observational study

2017· article· en· W2772391813 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Alice Dragomir, Armen Aprikian, Anil Kapoor, Antonio Finelli, Frédéric Pouliot, Ricardo Rendon, Peter C. Black, Ronald B. Moore, Rodney H. Breau, Jun Kawakami, Darrell Drachenberg, Jean‐Baptiste Lattouf, Simon Tanguay

Bibliographic record

VenueCMAJ Open · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal cell carcinoma treatment
Canadian institutionsQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObservational studyNephrectomyMedicineCompliance (psychology)General surgeryKidney cancerMedical physicsCancerSurgeryInternal medicineKidneyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Surgical tumour removal remains the preferred treatment for most patients with renal cell carcinoma, and many medical associations have proposed guidelines for the optimal surveillance of patients following surgery. This study evaluated the adherence of Canadian urologists to the follow-up guidelines proposed by the Canadian Urological Association (CUA) in 2009. METHODS: The study cohort was identified from the Canadian Kidney Cancer Information System, a prospectively populated database from 15 academic institutions in 6 Canadian provinces: British Colombia, Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec and Nova Scotia. A total of 1982 patients who underwent radical or partial nephrectomy for stage pT1-3N0M0 renal cancer between January 2011 and June 2016 were included in the cohort. Numbers of abdominal and chest imaging tests performed during the follow-up period were captured and compared with the 2009 CUA guidelines. The level of compliance was measured by means of weighted κ and Pearson correlation statistics. Multivariate logistic regression was used to evaluate factors associated with noncompliance (under- or overtesting) in the postoperative surveillance period. RESULTS: Of the 1982 patients, 1380 had stage pT1 disease, 164 had stage pT2 disease, and 438 had stage pT3 disease. There was incongruent adherence to the CUA surveillance guidelines, with a ratio of observed to recommended tests of 0.71 and 2.27 for chest and abdominal imaging, respectively. Overall, moderate correlation between observed and recommended tests was observed, with the highest value found for abdominal imaging in the pT3 group (κ = 0.59 [95% confidence interval 0.52-0.66]). Patients who underwent radical nephrectomy and those who presented with a higher stage of the disease were less likely to receive fewer chest imaging tests than recommended, and those with stage pT2 disease, those with stage pT3 disease, those with conventional clear cell renal cell carcinoma and those with a low-risk histologic type had an increased risk of undertesting. INTERPRETATION: In the 6 Canadian provinces, there are large differences between guidelines and clinical practice in imaging surveillance after nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma. Better adherence to clinical guidelines could improve optimization of health care services.

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)0.006
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 score0.999
Threshold uncertainty score0.146

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.008
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.306
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.115 · 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCMAJ OpenSame topicRenal cell carcinoma treatmentFrench-language works237,207