Incidence trends of conjunctival malignant melanoma in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Melanoma is the most common primary malignancy of the eye in adults. While the epidemiology of uveal melanoma has recently been described in Canada, little is known about the epidemiology and geographic distribution of patients with conjunctival melanoma (CM) in Canada. METHODS: We conducted a population-based study of CM incidence across all Canadian provinces and territories during 1992-2010 using two independent population-based registries. RESULTS: 190 patients were diagnosed with CM in Canada from 1992 to 2010. 55.3 % of these patients were men. The mean annual incidence rate of CM in Canada was 0.32 cases per million individuals (0.35 and 0.29 cases per million individuals for men and women, respectively). The incidence rates for Canadian provinces demonstrated that the eastern provinces of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick had higher age-adjusted incidence rates than the national average, with rates of 0.52 and 0.47 cases per million individuals per year, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis demonstrates novel variations in CM incidence rates between different Canadian provinces. These results taken together with the data reported from the USA confirm the North-to-South geographic gradient of increasing CM incidence. This research highlights that the epidemiology of CM in North America is comparable to that of cutaneous malignant melanoma in contrast to the trends for uveal melanoma distribution.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".