MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2922469210 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwz006.272

A273 COMPLIANCE WITH FIT SCREENING IN A CANADIAN PROVINCIAL COLON CANCER SCREENING PROGRAM LEADS TO GREATER LIKELIHOOD OF AN EARLY STAGE AT DIAGNOSIS.

2019· article· en· W2922469210 on OpenAlexaffabout
Donald MacIntosh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNova scotiaColorectal cancerStage (stratigraphy)CancerColonoscopyCancer screeningColorectal cancer screeningInternal medicineCancer registryFamily medicineOncology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since 2009, a province-wide colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program has been underway in Nova Scotia. Fecal immunochemical tests (FIT) have been mailed to each NS resident age 50–74 every two years. Subjects with a positive FIT result undergo colonoscopy. Currently uptake with FIT is approximately 30%. We decided to determine if there was a difference in the stage at diagnosis between FIT compliant and non-compliant Nova Scotians diagnosed with CRC since 2009. The authors identified ICD-O-3 codes for cancer sites, histologies and behaviour for cancers that can be detected with FIT. The appropriate cancers were abstracted from the Nova Scotia Cancer Registry (NSCR) for colorectal cancers diagnosed between 2001 and 2016. Patients diagnosed with cancer during or after 2009 were matched with the Nova Scotia Colon Cancer Prevention Program (NSCCPP) Cancer Care Application Screening Platform and Event Relationships (CCASPER) database to determine FIT screening compliance. Cancers were defined as “screen detected” if the patient had a positive FIT test result between 30 months and 22 days priorto the diagnosis date. All others were considered non-compliant with FIT screening. The distribution of the stage at diagnosis for cancers diagnosed prior to the onset of NS screening program (2009) was determined using NSCR data. Subsequently, the stage distribution for cancers diagnosed after the start of screening program for both non-participants and participants of the screening program was also determined from the NSCR. When diagnosed with CRC before the onset of programmatic screening (2001–09), approximately 45% of Nova Scotians were discovered at a late stage (3–4). Subsequently with the introduction of FIT screening, the proportion of late stage at diagnosis has not changed if subjects were noncompliant (49%). However, in subjects diagnosed in the setting of positive FIT, the proportion of late stage at diagnosis has been markedly reduced (27%). More than half (54%) of compliant subjects were stage 0/1 at diagnosis. Compliance with a FIT screening program results in a clinically significant greater likelihood of earlier stage of CRC at diagnosis. The NSCCPP needs to improve uptake of FIT screening in Nova Scotia. CRC Stage at Diagnosis CRC Stage at Diagnosis None

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)0.006
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.137

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.255 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology→Same topicColorectal Cancer Screening and Detection→French-language works237,207→