Bibliographic record
Abstract
In their correspondence, Nolan etal. inquire specifically about the effect of oophorectomy on breast cancer risk in young women with BRCA1 mutations. At their request, we have revisited the data set described in our article and restricted the prospective analysis to 2222 BRCA1 carriers who were free of cancer at study entry and who were between age 25 and 45 years (mean age = 34.8 years). They were followed for breast cancer until age 50 years (mean = 5.2 years of follow-up). In this analysis, the adjusted hazard ratio of breast cancer associated with oophorectomy (time-dependent analysis) was 0.99 (95% confidence interval = 0.67 to 1.47). The hazard ratio was adjusted for age at baseline, country of residence, family history, and breastfeeding. In our study, there is no evidence that oophorectomy is associated with a reduction in the risk of first primary breast cancer in young women with BRCA1 mutations. An analysis of oophorectomy on the risk of contralateral breast cancer in this cohort is forthcoming.
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 | 0.003 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.059 | 0.041 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.031 | 0.022 |
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".