MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2800000815 · doi:10.1192/bjo.2018.5

Temporal order of cancers and mental disorders in an adult population

2018· article· en· W2800000815 on OpenAlexaff
David Cawthorpe, Marc Kerba, Aru Narendran, Harleen Ghuttora, Gabrielle Chartier, Norman Sartorius

Bibliographic record

VenueBJPsych Open · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaGenome CanadaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopulationPsychiatryPsychologyMedicineClinical psychologyOncologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Population-based examination of comorbidity is an emerging field of study. AIMS: The purpose of the present population level study is to expand our understanding of how cancer and mental illness are temporally associated. METHOD: A sample of 83 648 056 physician billing records for 664 838 (56% female) unique individuals over the age of 18 was stratified on ages 19-49 years and 50+ years, with temporal order of mental disorder and cancer forming the basis of comparison. RESULTS: Mental disorders preceded cancers for both genders within each age strata. The full range of cancers and mental disorders preceding or following each pivot ICD class are described in terms of frequency of diagnosis and duration in days, with specific examples illustrated. CONCLUSIONS: The temporal comorbidity between specific cancers and mental disorders may be useful in screening or clinical planning and may represent indicators of disease mechanism that warrant further screening or investigation. DECLARATION OF INTEREST: None.

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)0.003
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.332 · 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

Citations15
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBJPsych OpenSame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207