MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3208045032 · doi:10.1002/cac2.12218

The Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO) clinical guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma

2021· article· en· W3208045032 on OpenAlexaff
Ling‐Long Tang, Yu‐Pei Chen, Chuanben Chen, Ming‐Yuan Chen, Nian‐Yong Chen, Xiaozhong Chen, Xiaojing Du, Wen‐Feng Fang, Mei Feng, Jin Gao, Fei Han, Xia He, Chaosu Hu, Desheng Hu, Guang‐Yuan Hu, Hao Jiang, Wei Jiang, Feng Jin, Jinyi Lang, Jingao Li, Shaojun Lin, Xu Liu, Qiu‐Fang Liu, Lin Ma, Hai‐Qiang Mai, Jiyong Qin, Liangfang Shen, Ying Sun, Peiguo Wang, Rensheng Wang, Ruozheng Wang, Xiao‐Shen Wang, Ying Wang, Hui Wu, Yunfei Xia, Shaowen Xiao, Kunyu Yang, Junlin Yi, Xiaodong Zhu, Jun Ma

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Communications · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Cancer Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNasopharyngeal carcinomaMedicineClinical OncologyInternal medicineOncologyIncidence (geometry)Medical physicsIntensive care medicineRadiation therapyCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is a malignant epithelial tumor originating in the nasopharynx and has a high incidence in Southeast Asia and North Africa. To develop these comprehensive guidelines for the diagnosis and management of NPC, the Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO) arranged a multi-disciplinary team comprising of experts from all sub-specialties of NPC to write, discuss, and revise the guidelines. Based on the findings of evidence-based medicine in China and abroad, domestic experts have iteratively developed these guidelines to provide proper management of NPC. Overall, the guidelines describe the screening, clinical and pathological diagnosis, staging and risk assessment, therapies, and follow-up of NPC, which aim to improve the management of NPC.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.106

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0070.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.463
GPT teacher head0.573
Teacher spread0.110 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations401
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer CommunicationsSame topicHead and Neck Cancer StudiesFrench-language works237,207