MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3024700546

Case-Completeness of Nonmalignant Central Nervous System Tumors in the Canadian Cancer Registry, 2011-2015.

2018· article· en· W3024700546 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dianne Zakaria, Amanda Shaw, Ryan Woods, Prithwish De, Faith G. Davis

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCancer registryEpidemiologyIncidence (geometry)DemographyPopulationPublic healthPathologyEnvironmental health
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The public health burden of nonmalignant central nervous system tumors (NMCNSTs) in Canada is unclear because casefinding and registration have historically been incomplete. The primary objective of this study is to quantify case-completeness of NMCNSTs in the Canadian Cancer Registry (CCR) using US Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program (SEER) rates as the standard. METHODS: Counts, distributions, and age-standardized incidence rates (ASIRs) for malignant central nervous system tumors (MCNSTs) and NMCNSTs by sex, age, site, histology, tumor size, World Health Organization (WHO) grade, and year of diagnosis were estimated for the United States and Canada (excluding Quebec) for the time period 2011-2015 using SEER and CCR data, respectively. Canadian and provincial standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) were also calculated by sex, age, site, histology and year of diagnosis using SEER rates as the standard. Under the assumptions of high NMCNST case-completeness in SEER registries and comparable population-based rates in the United States and Canada, SIRs less than 100% suggest incomplete case registration. RESULTS: Between 2011 and 2015, the ASIR for MCNSTs is similar in the United States (6.97 per 100,000 persons; 95% CI, 6.89-7.05), Canada (7.11 per 100,000; 95% CI, 6.97-7.24), and across provinces (range, 6.53-7.35 per 100,000). Conversely, the ASIR for NMCNSTs is 1.61 times greater in the United States (17.15 per 100,000; 95% CI, 17.02-17.27) than Canada (10.65 per 100,000; 95% CI, 10.49-10.82). SIRs for NMCNSTs range from 22.5% (95% CI, 15.6%-31.5%) in Prince Edward Island to 85.3% (95% CI, 83.7%-86.9%) in Ontario and vary by demographics, tumor characteristics, and year. Identified data limitations include nonspecific tumor characteristics and potential misclassification. CONCLUSION: NMCNST surveillance in Canada is compromised by incomplete case registration and data quality limitations. Enhancement of case ascertainment processes for these tumors, which may be diagnosed radiologically, may be warranted.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Reporting · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score0.233

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.011
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.216 · 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.

Study designObservational
DomainReporting
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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→