Limited adequacy of thyroid cancer patient follow-up at a Canadian tertiary care centre
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We sought to evaluate the adequacy of follow-up of thyroid cancer patients at a Canadian centre. METHODS: We mailed a survey to the family physicians of thyroid cancer patients and analyzed the findings relative to follow-up guidelines published by the American Thyroid Association (ATA). Statistical significance between early and late follow-up patterns was analyzed using the χ(2) test. RESULTS: Our survey response rate was 56.2% (91 of 162). The time from operation ranged from 1.24-7.13 (mean 3.96) years, and 87.9% of patients had undergone a physical exam within the previous year. Only 37.4% and 14% of patients had a serum thyroglobulin measurement within 6 and between 6 and 12 months before the survey, respectively. Thyroid simulating hormone (TSH) levels were measured within the prior 6 months in 67% of patients and between 6 and 12 months in 13.2%. The TSH levels were suppressed (< 0.1 μIU/L) in 24.2% of patients, 0.1-2 μIU/L in 44% and greater than 2 μIU/L in 17.6%. Ultrasonography was the most common imaging test performed. CONCLUSION: There is significant variation in the follow-up patterns of patients with thyroid cancer, and there is considerable deviation from current ATA guidelines.
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 | 0.002 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".