MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4213216566 · doi:10.1177/030089161309900309

Estimates of cancer burden in Umbria

2013· article· en· W4213216566 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueTumori Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening
Canadian institutionsSurgical Specialties (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCancerIncidence (geometry)Colorectal cancerCancer registryProstate cancerLung cancerCervical cancerBreast cancerEpidemiologyCervixDemographyRelative survivalProstateMortality rateEpidemiology of cancerOncologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aims and background Model-based estimates and projections of epidemiological indicators related to cancer are important tools to support public health policies and planning. The aim of the present study is to produce projections of cancer incidence, mortality and prevalence for the Umbria region (900,000 inhabitants) in central Italy. Methods The estimations were obtained by applying the MIAMOD method, a statistical back-calculation approach to derive incidence and prevalence figures starting from mortality and relative survival data. Published data from the Italian cancer registries were modeled in order to estimate regional cancer survival. Estimated incidence rates were validated with observed incidence rates obtained from the Umbria regional cancer registry. Results The most frequent cancer sites estimated were colon-rectum, prostate and breast in women, with 970, 615 and 729 new diagnoses, respectively, in 2012. The incidence rates were increasing for female lung cancer, male colorectal cancer, and melanoma. By contrast, the rates have been declining for cervix and stomach cancer. For lung cancer and prostate cancer in men and colorectal cancer in women the rates increased, reaching a peak in different periods, and then decreased. The incidence rates of breast cancer rose, reaching a plateau in the mid 2010s. Favorable mortality trends were predicted for all cancers except skin melanoma and lung cancer in women. The prevalence of cancer was increasing with the only exception of cervical cancer in women and lung cancer in men in the most recent estimation period. Conclusion The scenario found for cancer incidence and prevalence was largely influenced by screening activities, so that increasing or stable incidence rates may reflect active preventive efforts. Aging, screening, and more complex and costly treatments pose a problem of sustainability and selection of interventions to the regional oncology system. Evaluation of effectiveness of intervention and cost-benefit analyses will be important to ensure cancer control in the future.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.311 · 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