MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Feasibility of oncology clinical trial-embedded evaluation of social determinants of health

2022· preprint· en· W4223651932 on OpenAlexaff
Rahela Aziz‐Bose, Daniel J. Zheng, Puja J. Umaretiya, Lenka Ilcisin, Kristen E. Stevenson, Victoria Koch, Ariana Valenzuela, Peter D. Cole, Lisa Gennarini, Justine M. Kahn, Kara M. Kelly, Bruno Michon, Thai Hoa Tran, Jennifer Welch, Lewis B. Silverman, Joanne Wolfe, Kira Bona

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineUniversité Laval
FundersNational Institutes of HealthNational Cancer InstituteAmerican Society of Pediatric Hematology/Oncology
KeywordsClinical trialHealth equitySocial determinants of healthIntervention (counseling)MedicineEquity (law)Internal medicineOncologyFamily medicineGerontologyPsychologyPolitical scienceNursingPublic healthLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Social determinants of health (SDoH) are associated with stark disparities in cancer outcomes, but systematic SDoH data collection is currently absent from oncology clinical trials. Trial-based SDoH data are essential to ensure representation of marginalized populations, contextualize outcomes, and identify health-equity intervention opportunities. We report the feasibility of the first pediatric oncology multicenter trial-embedded SDoH investigation. Among 448 trial participants, 392 (87.5%) opted-in to the embedded SDoH study; 375 (95.7%) completed baseline surveys, with high longitudinal response rates (87.2-92.8%) over 24-months of therapy. Trial-embedded SDoH data collection is feasible and acceptable, and must be consistently included within future oncology trials.

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)0.310
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.312
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.310
Threshold uncertainty score0.851

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.3100.312
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.007
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.488
GPT teacher head0.604
Teacher spread0.116 · 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.

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life→French-language works237,207→