DEV-07. THE LATIN-AMERICAN BRAIN TUMOR BOARD (LATB) TELECONFERENCE: RESULTS OF A WEB-BASED SURVEY TO EVALUATE PARTICIPANT EXPERIENCE AND THE PROGRAM
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The LATB is a weekly teleconference operating over 3.5 years connecting pediatric neuro-oncologists from high-income countries with pediatric subspecialists from 20 Latin-American countries. This survey explored the participants’ experience utilizing this resource. A web-based questionnaire was distributed to 159 participants through email and www.Cure4Kids.org. Ninety-five respondents (60%) from all the 20 participating countries completed the survey. Sixty-one reported frequent-attendance (≥ 1 per month), 23 reported infrequent-attendance (< 1 per month), and 11 never participated. The main barriers to attendance were the subspecialist’s respective workload (64%), the timing of the teleconference (38%), and internet connectivity problems (29%). Subspecialist’s workload amount was more commonly reported as a barrier compared with other barriers, in both the frequent and infrequent-attendance groups (p<0.05), with the exception of the timing of the meeting in the infrequent-attendance group. More than 80% found the frequency and duration of the teleconference were sufficient. Utilizing Spanish as the primary language was reported to enhance the teleconference recommendations by 93% of the respondents. The recommendations were reported to always or almost always fit the local circumstances by 84%, moreover; 99% of attending respondents found the teleconference provides a continuing medical education opportunity. Finally, 83% agreed to the need to include more subspecialties into LATB especially: neuroradiology, neuropathology, neurosurgery, and radiation-oncology. Participants found that weekly, one-hour sessions were sufficient to review the requested cases. Utilizing the participants’ first language makes the recommendations clearer and easier to follow. Physician workload is the main barrier to participate in the teleconference.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".