MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2893151206 · doi:10.1200/jgo.18.76500

Radiotherapy Facilities, Equipment, and Staffing in Brazil: A Survey by the Brazilian Society of Radiation Oncology

2018· article· en· W2893151206 on OpenAlex
Fábio Ynoe de Moraes, Lucas C. Mendez, G.N. Marta, Arthur Accioly Rosa, Eduardo Weltman

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Global Oncology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative and Oncologic Care
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStaffingMedicineRadiation oncologyPopulationFamily medicineDescriptive statisticsRadiation therapySocioeconomicsDemographyEnvironmental healthNursingSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The rising incidences in cancer, together with the population aging have increased the demand for radiotherapy (RT) services in Brazil. Currently, Brazil faces a dearth of RT and solutions to provide a more universal care to cancer is a hot topic in this country. Aim: To evaluate the current status of RT department, staffing, and techniques in Brazil for 2017 following the launch of the National Cancer Program and the EXPANDE program. Methods: The Brazilian Society for Radiation Oncology (SBRT), sent detailed, online-based survey to heads of departments of all Brazilian RT centers (public and private), located in the 27 states in 2017. The survey included questions related to personnel, equipment, type of the center, and % of patients treated (private exclusive (≥ 90% of the treatments focused the private system) or public exclusive (≥ 90% of the treatments focused the public system) or mixed). Respondents were asked to provide average data from the last 5 year. For final analysis we grouped the states per region north, northeast (NE), central-west (C), southeast (SE) and south. A descriptive analysis was performed. Results: A total of 142 responses from 212 sent surveys (67% response rate) were received from 23 states. The total number of the departments and median functioning years per federative region was: 7 departments and 8 years in the north; 27 and 13 years in the NE; 7 and 11.5 years in the central; 27 and 17 years in the south; and 72 and 20 years in the SE region, respectively. The rate of radiation oncologist, physicist, nurse and dosimetrist per department was 3.0, 2.0, 1.7, 0.2 (north), 3.2, 2.4, 1.6, 0.7 (NE), 2.5, 1.7, 1.0, 0.3 (central), 3.4, 2.6, 1.6, 0.7 (south) and 3.9, 2.8, 1.6, 0.9 (SE), respectively. High dose rate brachytherapy was offered by 70% of the departments in the north, 55% in the NE, 30% in the central, 40% in the SE and 37% in the south region, respectively. Ninety-five percent of the department had at least one linear accelerator and only 5% had exclusively cobalt machines. The minority of the centers offered intensity modulated RT (36%) and image-guided RT (42%). 3D-conformal was the technique offered by 87% of the departments and 18% of them still treat patients with 2D technique. Overall, 30% of the departments provide services to the public health system exclusively, 1% to the private sector only and 69% of the department to both private and public. Conclusion: Important heterogeneity in the number of departments and professionals involved within RT services among Brazilian regions was found. Most departments were found to be in operation > 10+ years, indicating the need for recent hardware and software update and/or maintenance. 3D-conformal is the most common offered technique and mixed approach (public and private partnership) is the most common model of business in the country.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.178
Threshold uncertainty score0.494

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.357 · 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