MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3194203769 · doi:10.1002/ijc.33774

International variation in childhood cancer mortality rates from 2001 to 2015: Comparison of trends in the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership countries

2021· article· en· W3194203769 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lesley Smith, Charles Stiller, Joanne F. Aitken, Lisa Lyngsie Hjalgrim, Tom Børge Johannesen, Päivi M. Lähteenmäki, Martin G. McCabe, Kathy Pritchard‐Jones, Eva Steliarova‐Foucher, Jeanette Falck Winther, Ryan Woods, Adam Glaser, Richard Feltbower

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Cancer · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening
Canadian institutionsCanadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer ControlSimon Fraser UniversityBC Cancer Agency
FundersNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchWorld Health Organization
KeywordsBenchmarkingGeneral partnershipCancerVariation (astronomy)Childhood cancerDemographyEnvironmental healthMedicinePolitical scienceBusinessSociologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite improved survival rates, cancer remains one of the most common causes of childhood death. The International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership (ICBP) showed variation in cancer survival for adults. We aimed to assess and compare trends over time in cancer mortality between children, adolescents and young adults (AYAs) and adults in the six countries involved in the ICBP: United Kingdom, Denmark, Australia, Canada, Norway and Sweden. Trends in mortality between 2001 and 2015 in the six original ICBP countries were examined. Age standardised mortality rates (ASR per million) were calculated for all cancers, leukaemia, malignant and benign central nervous system (CNS) tumours, and non-CNS solid tumours. ASRs were reported for children (age 0-14 years), AYAs aged 15 to 39 years and adults aged 40 years and above. Average annual percentage change (AAPC) in mortality rates per country were estimated using Joinpoint regression. For all cancers combined, significant temporal reductions were observed in all countries and all age groups. However, the overall AAPC was greater for children (-2.9; 95% confidence interval = -4.0 to -1.7) compared to AYAs (-1.8; -2.1 to -1.5) and adults aged >40 years (-1.5; -1.6 to -1.4). This pattern was mirrored for leukaemia, CNS tumours and non-CNS solid tumours, with the difference being most pronounced for leukaemia: AAPC for children -4.6 (-6.1 to -3.1) vs AYAs -3.2 (-4.2 to -2.1) and over 40s -1.1 (-1.3 to -0.8). AAPCs varied between countries in children for all cancers except leukaemia, and in adults over 40 for all cancers combined, but not in subgroups. Improvements in cancer mortality rates in ICBP countries have been most marked among children aged 0 to 14 in comparison to 15 to 39 and over 40 year olds. This may reflect better care, including centralised service provision, treatment protocols and higher trial recruitment rates in children compared to older patients.

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)0.014
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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.009
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.474
Teacher spread0.362 · 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

Citations12
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of CancerSame topicGlobal Cancer Incidence and ScreeningFrench-language works237,207