MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2802603973 · doi:10.1177/1203475418773360

Brief Report: Increase in Melanoma Incidence in Ontario

2018· article· en· W2802603973 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Annie Langley, Linda E. Lévesque, Tara Baetz, Yuka Asai

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cutaneous Medicine and Surgery · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCutaneous Melanoma Detection and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoQueen's UniversityOttawa Hospital
FundersInstitute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences
KeywordsMedicineIncidence (geometry)Cancer registryDemographyMelanomaRetrospective cohort studyPopulationSocioeconomic statusEpidemiologyCohortPediatricsSurgeryEnvironmental healthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Melanoma is a serious, potentially lethal disease. It is one of very few common cancers whose incidence is rising in North America. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to examine trends in melanoma incidence in Ontario, Canada's most populous province, over the past 20 years. METHODS: Using data from the Ontario Cancer Registry (OCR), this retrospective cohort examined all incident cases of melanoma in Ontario from 1990 to 2012. Generalized linear modeling was used to evaluate changes in melanoma incidence over time, adjusting for age and sex using direct standardization with the 1991 Canadian census population. Tests for trend for changes in the distribution of cases by age, sex, socioeconomic status, and rurality status were also calculated. RESULTS: Our results show a statistically significant increasing incidence of melanoma in Ontario from 9.3 cases per 100 000 in 1990 to 18.0 cases per 100 000 in 2012 ( P for trend <.001, adjusted for age and sex). Incidence rates show stabilization from 2010 to 2012. CONCLUSION: Our study reveals a marked increase in melanoma incidence in Ontario, more than doubling over the past 20 years but with a stabilization more recently. Adequate availability of dermatology services may be important to ensure satisfactory care for the increased caseload and to ensure that cases may detected at an early stage with a good prognosis.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.419
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations16
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cutaneous Medicine and SurgerySame topicCutaneous Melanoma Detection and ManagementFrench-language works237,207