Incidence, Mortality, and Spatiotemporal Distribution of Cutaneous Malignant Melanoma Cases Across Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We recently reported a steady increase in the incidence and mortality of cutaneous malignant melanoma (CMM) in Canada during 1992-2010. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this article is to examine the distribution of Canadian CMM patients at the level of provinces, cities, and forward sortation area (FSA) postal codes. METHODS: Using 3 Canadian population-based registries, we conducted an in-depth examination of the incidence and mortality trends for 72 565 Canadian CMM patients over the period 1992-2010. RESULTS: We found that among 20- to 39-year-olds, the incidence of CMM in women (7.17 per 100 000 individuals) was significantly higher than in men (4.60 per 100 000 individuals per year). Women age 80 years and older had an incidence of CMM (58.46 cases per 100 000 women per year) more than 4 times greater than the national average (12.29 cases per 100 000 population per year) and a corresponding high mortality rate (20.18 deaths per 100 000 women per year), when compared with the Canadian melanoma mortality of 2.4 deaths per 100 000 per year. In other age groups men had higher incidence and corresponding melanoma mortality rates. We also studied CMM incidence by province, city, and FSA postal codes and identified several high-incidence communities that were located near the coast/waterfronts. In addition, plotting latitude measures for cities and FSAs vs CMM incidence rate confirmed the inverse relationship between geographical latitude and incidence of melanoma in Canada (slope = -0.22 ± 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This research may help develop sex-, age- and geographic region-specific recommendations to decrease the future burden of CMM in Canada.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".