MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2894160248 · doi:10.1200/jgo.18.15400

Canada's Progress to Make Smoking Cessation a First-Line Cancer Treatment

2018· article· en· W2894160248 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Deb Keen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Global Oncology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSmoking cessationCancerAmbulatoryFamily medicineEnvironmental healthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Evidence indicates that smoking cessation improves the effectiveness of treatment and likelihood of survival among all cancer patients, not just those with tobacco-related disease, yet smoking is rarely addressed in oncology practice. Prior to 2016, only 3 provinces in Canada (out of a total of 10 provinces and three territories) reported implementation of smoking cessation for ambulatory cancer patients. Aim: Based on this evidence, the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer (CPAC) implemented a systems change initiative to promote adoption of evidence-based smoking cessation within provincial and territorial cancer systems across Canada. Methods: In 2016, CPAC funded seven provinces and two territories over a 15-month period to plan, implement or evaluate integration of evidence-based smoking cessation for ambulatory cancer patients within cancer systems. Funds were used to plan (2 provinces and 2 territories), implement (3 provinces) or evaluate (2 provinces) systematic, evidence-based approaches to smoking cessation within ambulatory cancer care settings (e.g., establishing routine systems for identification of smoking cancer patients and system to support patients to quit). Funds could not be used for direct service delivery (e.g., cessation counseling). Results: After 15-months of funding from CPAC, 6 provinces reported implementation of smoking cessation for ambulatory cancer patients. The remaining province and 2 territories funded by CPAC reported development of plans for adoption of smoking cessation for cancer patients in the future. Within provinces reporting implementation of smoking cessation for cancer patients, between 65%-97% of ambulatory cancer patients were screened for smoking status; 22%-80% of these patients were offered a referral to cessation services, and 21%-45% of cancer patients accepted a referral. Conclusion: Despite provincial and territorial variations in readiness to uptake evidence-based smoking cessation for cancer patients, CPAC's approach has led to substantial progress in adoption of this approach across Canada. While progress has been made, adoption of smoking cessation and relapse prevention by cancer systems is not yet widespread in Canada. Scale-up to remaining provinces and territory, and spread within existing provinces and territories is required to reach all cancer patients and families who require support to quit smoking. Framing smoking cessation as a therapeutic intervention, not prevention, and a routine part of cancer treatment will be critical for sustainability of this work.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.646
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.339 · 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Global OncologySame topicGlobal Cancer Incidence and ScreeningFrench-language works237,207