MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W33900750 · doi:10.1021/acs.jcim.1c00056

407 Akciğer Kanseri Olgusunun Geriye Dönük Analizi

2008· article· en· W33900750 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Uğur Gönlügür, Tanseli Gönlügür

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Chemical Information and Modeling · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchSimons Foundation
KeywordsMedicineAdenocarcinomaLung cancerSmall-cell carcinomaCarcinomaInternal medicineBasal cellLungOncologySpirometryBiopsyRetrospective cohort studySmall Cell Lung CarcinomaCancerGastroenterologyRadiologyAsthma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY RETROSPECTIVE ANALYSIS OF 407 PATIENTS WITH LUNG CANCER Aim: The aim of this study was to reveal the demographic and clinical characteristics of cases diagnosed as lung cancer in our hospital. Material and Methods: Data from a university hospital between 1993 and 2005 were retrospectively analyzed. Results: The study involved 369 (91%) men and 36 women. The mean age was 60 ± 10 years. Forty-one percent of the patients who had an acceptable spirometry had chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The most useful diagnostic procedure were bronchial biopsy (62%) and bronchial aspirate (22%). The most common histopathologic subtypes were squamous cell carcinoma (51.4%), small cell lung carcinoma (23.6%), unspecified non-small cell lung carcinoma (13.0%), adenocarcinoma (10.8%), and large cell carcinoma (1.2%). Small cell carcinoma was the most frequent (39.5%) subtype in women.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Chemical Information and ModelingSame topicLung Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207