MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281792300 · doi:10.2196/38874

The Variations in Care and Real-world Outcomes in Individuals With Rectal Cancer: Protocol for the Ontario Rectal Cancer Cohort

2022· article· en· W4281792300 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Sunil V. Patel, Chad McClintock, Christopher M. Booth, Shaila J. Merchant, Carl Heneghan, Clare Bankhead

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsColorectal cancerMedicineProtocol (science)CancerCohortCohort studyDemographyFamily medicineOncologyInternal medicineAlternative medicinePathologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Individuals with rectal cancer require a number of pretreatment investigations, often require multidisciplinary treatment, and require ongoing follow-ups after treatment is completed. Due to the complexity of treatments, large variations in practice patterns and outcomes have been identified. At present, few comprehensive, population-level data sets are available for assessing interventions and outcomes in this group. OBJECTIVE: Our study aims to create a comprehensive database of individuals with rectal cancer who have been treated in a single-payer, universal health care system. This database will provide an excellent resource that investigators can use to study variations in the delivery of care to and real-world outcomes of this population. METHODS: The Ontario Rectal Cancer Cohort database will include comprehensive details about the management and outcomes of individuals with rectal cancer who have been diagnosed in Ontario, Canada (population: 14.6 million), between 2010 and 2019. Linked administrative data sets will be used to construct this comprehensive database. Individual and care provider characteristics, investigations, treatments, follow-ups, and outcomes will be derived and linked. Surgical pathology details, including the stage of disease, histopathology characteristics, and the quality of surgical excision, will be included. Ethics approval for this study was obtained through the Queen's University Health Sciences and Affiliated Teaching Hospitals Research Ethics Board. RESULTS: Approximately 20,000 individuals who meet the inclusion criteria for this study have been identified. Data analysis is ongoing, with an expected completion date of March 2023. This study was funded through the Canadian Institute of Health Research Operating Grant. CONCLUSIONS: The Ontario Rectal Cancer Cohort will include a comprehensive data set of individuals with rectal cancer who received care within a single-payer, universal health care system. This cohort will be used to determine factors associated with regional variability and adherence to recommended care, and it will allow for an assessment of a number of understudied areas within the delivery of rectal cancer treatment. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR1-10.2196/38874.

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)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
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: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.966
Threshold uncertainty score0.876

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0060.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.003

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 head0.174
GPT teacher head0.547
Teacher spread0.373 · 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
GenreProtocol

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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicColorectal Cancer Surgical TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207