MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Comparing cervical cancer stage at diagnosis in immigrant women and long-term residents.

2016· article· en· W2891993411 on OpenAlexaffabout
Teja Voruganti, Rahim Moineddin, Nathaniel Jembere, L. Elit, Eva Grunfeld, Aïsha Lofters

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalJuravinski Cancer CentreInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineImmigrationCervical cancerCohortStage (stratigraphy)Socioeconomic statusCancerDemographyRetrospective cohort studyOdds ratioCohort studyGynecologyInternal medicinePopulationEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e18054 Background: Globally, cervical cancer is the fourth most common cancer in women and seventh most common cancer overall. Cervical cancer is highly preventable with HPV vaccination and screening. Previous work has shown that immigrants are less likely to be screened than non-immigrants. Building on this work, the objective of our study was to examine whether immigrant women are more likely to present with later stage cervical cancer than long-term residents. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of women with cervical cancer diagnosed from 2010 to 2014 using administrative health data from the Canadian province of Ontario, comparing the odds of late stage diagnosis between immigrants and long-term residents. The outcome of interest was stage of cervical cancer diagnosis, defined as early (stage I) or late (stage II-IV). We compared immigrants and long-term residents on late vs. early stage adjusting for socioeconomic measures, comorbidities and healthcare utilization. We also confirmed results with a cohort from 2007-2012. Results: Complete staging data was available for 218 immigrants and 874 non-immigrants. We found no association between immigrant status and stage at diagnosis (adjusted OR: 0.935, p value = 0.739). Factors that did show significant association with later stage diagnosis were physician characteristics, whether a woman had been previously screened, or having visited a gynecologist in the past 3 years. These results were echoed in the 2007-2012 cohort (immigrants vs. long-term residents OR: 0.942, adjusted p value = 0.6773). Conclusions: Our results show that being an immigrant is not associated with late stage diagnosis of cervical cancer, although getting screened or having visited a gynecologist did reduce the odds of later stage cancer. Our findings support previous studies showing that physician characteristics influence immigrant healthcare utilization. Moreso, it may be that programs broadly aimed immigrants require a targeted approach to address higher-risk subgroups.

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 score0.140
Threshold uncertainty score0.279

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.198
GPT teacher head0.516
Teacher spread0.318 · 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicCervical Cancer and HPV Research→French-language works237,207→