MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3005669437

Use and overuse of diagnostic neck ultrasound in Ontario: Retrospective population-based cohort study.

2020· article· en· W3005669437 on OpenAlexaffabout
Stephen F. Hall, Rebecca Griffiths

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThyroid Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRetrospective cohort studyMedical diagnosisThyroid cancerCohortPopulationHealth careDemographyCancerPediatricsFamily medicineSurgeryEnvironmental healthPathologyInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To provide an overview of the use and possible overuse of diagnostic neck ultrasound (DNUS) by describing and comparing both the ordering rates and the downstream results of DNUS by regions across Ontario. DESIGN: Retrospective population-based cohort study based on electronic health care data. SETTING: Ontario. PARTICIPANTS: Ontario residents (adults aged > 18 years) who had a diagnosis of thyroid cancer between October 1, 1999, and June 30, 2014, and residents who had a DNUS in 2012. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportion of Ontario residents in each sub-Local Health Integration Network (LHIN) group who had their first DNUS in 2012 and went on to other relevant tests, diagnoses, and surgery. The sub-LHIN groups were based on increasing age- and sex-adjusted rates of first DNUS. RESULTS: There were 77 238 DNUS tests in 2012 and there was a 7.4-fold variation in the rate of test ordering across the sub-LHIN populations leading to variable rates of actual disease, suggesting screening or uncertain indications for tests. CONCLUSION: Across Ontario, the indications for ordering DNUS are variable, and screening or testing without indication might be a common practice. Establishing effective guidelines for the ordering of DNUS would potentially reduce costs and ultimately reduce the rates of thyroid cancer.

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)0.002
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 score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.191

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicThyroid Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207