MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2804376572

Mammographic Density as a Risk Factor for Ovarian Cancer: A Pilot Study.

2010· dissertation· en· W2804376572 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Linda Linton

Bibliographic record

VenueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada) · 2010
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfrared Thermography in Medicine
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMAMMOGRAPHIC DENSITYOvarian cancerMedicineRisk factorFactor (programming language)GynecologyOncologyObstetricsBreast cancerCancerComputer scienceInternal medicineMammography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ovarian cancer and breast cancer share many of the same risk factors. The strongest known risk factor for breast cancer is mammographic density, the radiological appearance of breast tissue on a mammogram. Even though breast and ovarian cancer share many of the same risk factors, mammographic density has never been examined in relation to ovarian cancer. The present thesis describes a pilot study that was conducted to determine the feasibility of a study looking to address the issue of mammographic density as a risk factor for ovarian cancer. It was found that a larger study was feasible and should consist of approximately 700 case-control pairs recruited from cancer centres across Ontario, with cases matched to sisters or first-degree cousins. It was also found that the use of sister controls for cases did not lead to overmatching on mammographic density, and sisters are a suitable control group.

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 score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.125

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada)Same topicInfrared Thermography in MedicineFrench-language works237,207