A PRE-OPERATIVE PREDICTIVE MODEL FOR THE CLASSIFICATION OF NEWLY DIAGNOSED RENAL MASSES LESS THAN 5 CM IN DIAMETER AS BENIGN OR MALIGNANT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To develop a predictive model for preoperative differentiation between benign (B) and malignant (M) histology in patients with renal masses (RM) using recursive partitioning.\nMethods: We analyzed preoperative patient and tumour characteristics in 395 subjects who had surgery for RM suspicious for renal cell carcinoma.\nResults: The model predicted B vs. M histology with an overall accuracy of 89.6% (95% CI 86.2,92.5). It assigned patients with smaller tumours (<5.67cc) and a predominantly (>45%) exophytic component a high risk of B disease (52.6%). Patients with symptoms, larger tumours (>5.67cc) and larger endophytic component (>35%) have a 0% risk of B disease.\nConclusion: B vs. M disease can be predicted accurately. This predictive accuracy is higher than that shown in renal biopsy series. It is hypothesized that for smaller and exophytic RMs, a biopsy is indicated. Symptomatic, larger and endophytic RMs should be removed without further investigations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".