Geographic disparities in Saskatchewan prostate cancer incidence and its association with physician density: analysis using Bayesian models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Saskatchewan has one of the highest incidence of prostate cancer (PCa) in Canada. This study assesses if geographic factors in Saskatchewan, including location of where patients live and physician density are affecting the PCa incidence. First, the objective of this study is to estimate the PCa standardized incidence ratio (SIRs) in Saskatchewan stratified by PCa risk-level. Second, this study identifies clusters of higher than and lower than expected PCa SIRs in Saskatchewan. Lastly, this study identifies the association (if any) between family physician density and estimated PCa SIRs in Saskatchewan. METHODS: First, using Global Moran's I, Local Moran's I, and the Kuldorff's Spatial Scan Statistic, the study identifies clusters of PCa stratified by risk-levels. Then this study estimates the SIRs of PCa and its association with family physician density in Saskatchewan using the Besag, York, and Mollie (BYM) Bayesian method. RESULTS: Higher than expected clusters of crude estimated SIR for metastatic PCa were identified in north-east Saskatchewan and lower than expected clusters were identified in south-east Saskatchewan. Areas in north-west Saskatchewan have lower than expected crude estimated SIRs for both intermediate-risk and low-risk PCa. Family physician density was negatively associated with SIRs of metastatic PCa (IRR: 0.935 [CrI: 0.880 to 0.998]) and SIRs of high-risk PCa (IRR: 0.927 [CrI: 0.880 to 0.975]). CONCLUSIONS: This study identifies the geographical disparities in risk-stratified PCa incidence in Saskatchewan. The study identifies areas with a lower family physician density have a higher-than-expected incidences of metastatic and high-risk PCa. Hence policies to increase the number of physicians should ensure an equitable geographic distribution of primary care physicians to support early detection of diseases, including PCa.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".