MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Determination of quality of care for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma in Nova Scotia.

2020· article· en· W3005126119 on OpenAlexaffabout
Cathie Ouellet, Ravi Ramjeesingh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple and Secondary Primary Cancers
Canadian institutionsNova Scotia Cancer CentreDalhousie UniversityUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHepatocellular carcinomaReferralMalignancyCancerInternal medicineSorafenibLiver cancerRetrospective cohort studyFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

506 Background: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common primary malignancy found in the liver. Little is known about the outcomes of HCC patients in the province of Nova Scotia (NS). There is suggestion that closer proximity to tertiary cancer center provides better outcomes for HCC patients. We postulate that cancer care for HCC patients differs based on a patient’s accessibility to an academic cancer care center. Methods: A retrospective chart review of HCC patients diagnosed from 2015 to 2017, looking at referrals patterns, treatments and wait time was undertaken. Patients who live within the urban area of Halifax, NS (N = 97), where the academic cancer center is, was compared to patients who live outside Halifax (rural, N = 70). Results: 167 patients were identified with a diagnosis of HCC, which included 139 males and 28 females with median age of 68 years old at HCC diagnosis. During that period, only 35.3% of patients diagnosed with HCC had a tissue diagnosis and 67.7% had a baseline AFP (16% had an AFP > 400). Just over 76% were diagnosed based on clinical features. Surgical intervention occurred in 15.6% and local treatments including radiation and TACE occurred in 35.3% of patients .Referral rate to Medical Oncology (MO) was 37.7%, of which 34.1% of patients had seen a MO at the time of data cut off (09-15-2019). 22 patients were eligible for systemic therapy but only 14 patients received systemic treatment (sorafenib n = 14). Conclusions: Initial data suggests patients who live in Halifax appear to have better outcomes than those outside. Further analysis is required to identify what differs between the urban and rural centers accounting for the seen difference in survival. [Table: see text]

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.241

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.155
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicMultiple and Secondary Primary CancersFrench-language works237,207