MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2988962752 · doi:10.1186/s12889-019-7611-6

From prospective clinical trial to reducing social inequalities in health: The DESSEIN trial, concept and design of a multidisciplinary study in precarious patients with breast cancer

2019· article· en· W2988962752 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Charlotte Ngô, Aurélia Dinut, Audrey Bochaton, Hélène Charreire, Caroline Desprès, Sandrine Baffert, Fabrice Lécuru, Gilles Châtellier

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Public Health · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCNIB
KeywordsMedicineMultidisciplinary approachBreast cancerResidenceBiostatisticsObservational studyHealth carePublic healthSocial inequalityClinical trialQualitative researchEpidemiologyFamily medicineGerontologyNursingInequalityCancerDemographyEconomic growthPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In France during the last 15 years, precariousness among women has increased. In breast cancer, precariousness has been associated with an increase in mortality, but the links between precariousness, stage at diagnosis and care pathway are little explored. Our study aims to evaluate the impact of precariousness on care pathways, treatment and recovery phase according to a multidisciplinary analysis. METHODS AND DESIGN: Comparative prospective observational multicenter study of exposed / unexposed category. Patients with breast cancer are recruited in the Ile de France area. Three scores are used to identify precarious patients. Precarious patients are matched to non-precarious patients by age group. Questionnaires are distributed to patients at different times of care. The main objective is to compare the stage of the disease at diagnosis between two groups. The secondary objectives are: comparison of socio-economic and geographical characteristics, direct and indirect costs, personal trajectories of care and health. Analysis include multidisciplinary approaches. A geographical information systems method will evaluate the accessibility to health facilities and the characteristics of the places of residence of the patients. An anthropological analysis will be conducted through observation of consultations and semi-directed interviews with patients. These methods will allow to analyze the diagnostic and therapeutic routes, placing it in a life history and an economic, socio-cultural and health environment. The economic analysis will include a comparison of direct, indirect costs and out-off pocket costs, from the patient's point of view and from the societal perspective. DISCUSSION: Conducted in a clinical setting and coupled with a qualitative study, this study will provide a better understanding of how contextual factors, combined with individual factors, can influence the course of health and thus the stage of the disease at diagnosis. The multidisciplinary approach, involving clinicians, geographers, an anthropologist, an economist and a health epidemiologist, will allow a multidimensional approach to the impact of precariousness on breast cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02948478 registered October 28, 2016. ID RCB: 2016-A00589-42. protocol version: 2.1. decembre 13, 2018.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.259
GPT teacher head0.466
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Public Health→Same topicGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening→French-language works237,207→