MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3135169920 · doi:10.1136/ijgc-2020-002315

Development of a surgical competency assessment tool for sentinel lymph node dissection by minimally invasive surgery for endometrial cancer

2021· article· en· W3135169920 on OpenAlexafffund
Kristen Moloney, Monika Janda, Michael Frumovitz, Mario M. Leitão, Nadeem R. Abu‐Rustum, Emma Rossi, James Nicklin, Marie Plante, Fabrice Lécuru, Alessandro Buda, Andrea Mariani, Yee Leung, Sarah Ferguson, René Pareja, Rainer Kimmig, Pearl Tong, Orla McNally, Naven Chetty, Kaijiang Liu, Kenneth Jaaback, Julio Lau, Joseph Ng, Henrik Falconer, Jan Persson, Russell Land, Fabio Martinelli, Andrea Garrett, Alon D. Altman, Adam Pendlebury, David Cibula, Donal J. Brennan, Thomas Ind, Cor D. de Kroon, Ka Yu Tse, George B. Hanna, Andreas Obermair

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Gynecological Cancer · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEndometrial and Cervical Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsCancerCare ManitobaUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkUniversité LavalUniversity of ManitobaCentre hospitalier universitaire de Québec
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthIntuitive SurgicalCancerCare Manitoba FoundationPfizerStrykerSanofiAstraZenecaMemorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center
KeywordsMedicineEndometrial cancerSentinel lymph nodeDissection (medical)Medical physicsDelphi methodSentinel nodeVulvar cancerSurgical oncologyGeneral surgeryBreast cancerSurgeryCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations63
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Gynecological CancerSame topicEndometrial and Cervical Cancer TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207