MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2783949971 · doi:10.1002/cncr.31231

Chinese and South Asian ethnicity, immigration status, and clinical cancer outcomes in the Ontario Cancer System

2018· article· en· W2783949971 on OpenAlexafffundabout
James K. R. Stevenson, Matthew C. Cheung, Craig C. Earle, Hadas D. Fischer, Ximena Camacho, Refik Saskin, Baiju R. Shah, Peter C. Austin, Simron Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Work & HealthHealth Sciences CentreInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesSunnybrook Health Science CentreOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchUniversity of Toronto
FundersOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care
KeywordsMedicineDemographyImmigrationHazard ratioEthnic groupConfidence intervalChinese americansCohort studyCancerPopulationCohortProportional hazards modelGerontologyInternal medicineEnvironmental healthGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In the United States, certain minority groups have been shown to have inferior cancer outcomes compared with the white majority population. However, to the authors' knowledge, the majority of research has not separated ethnicity from immigration status. The objective of the current study was to determine the impact of ethnicity, independent of immigration status, on cancer outcomes in Chinese and South Asian populations in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: The authors conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study using administrative databases in Ontario, Canada. Incident cancer cases were captured in Canadian-born Chinese and South Asian individuals, Chinese and South Asian immigrants, and the general Ontario reference population (non-Chinese/non-South Asian and non-immigrant) between 2000 and 2012. Subjects were followed until death (all-cause and cancer-specific), and Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate the impact of Chinese and South Asian ethnicity on cancer outcomes after adjusting for explanatory variables. RESULTS: A total of 423,678 cancer cases were identified; at total of 6631 cases were identified in Canadian-born Chinese individuals and 2752 cases in Canadian-born South Asian individuals. After adjustment, the rate of all-cause mortality was lower for Canadian-born Chinese (hazard ratio [HR], 0.829; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.795-0.865), Canadian-born South Asian (HR, 0.856; 95% CI, 0.797-0.919), and Chinese immigrant (recent immigrant: HR, 0.661 [95% CI, 0.610-0.716] and non-recent immigrant: HR, 0.853 [95% CI, 0.803-0.906]) populations compared with the general Ontario population. A similar effect was found for cancer-specific mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Chinese and South Asian ethnic groups appear to have lower cancer mortalities compared with the general Ontario population. After removing the well-documented protective effect of immigration, Chinese and South Asian ethnicities were found to be associated with a cancer survival advantage in Ontario, Canada. Cancer 2018;124:1473-82. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.099

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.346 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
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

Citations13
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancerSame topicGlobal Cancer Incidence and ScreeningFrench-language works237,207