MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4289816336 · doi:10.4236/ojepi.2022.123022

The Impact of Delays during the Pandemic Months on Survival of Lung Cancer Patients in Canada in 2020

2022· article· en· W4289816336 on OpenAlexaffabout
Luv Khandelwal, Housne Begum, Pria Nippak

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Journal of Epidemiology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 and healthcare impacts
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLung cancerIncidence (geometry)PopulationPandemicDemographyCancerStage (stratigraphy)Survival analysisCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)SurgeryDiseaseInternal medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and Purpose: Most cancer deaths in the world are due to lung cancer and diagnosis and treatment delays sharply reduce survival in lung cancer patients. This study examined the impact of delays during the early months of the pandemic on the survival of newly identified lung cancer patients in Canada in 2020. Method: This was a secondary data analysis from published literature and openly available data sources. Cancer Statistics from existing literature were used as a proxy for the month-wise distribution of lung cancer cases in Canada. The incidence of lung cancer, using population statistics from Statistics Canada and incidence rates from the Canadian Cancer Statistics in 2020, was estimated. The population-based Excel model employed compounded cuts on the incidence to arrive at the outcomes. Plotdigitzer.com tool was used to digitize the survival versus time curves for each stage from secondary sources. Stage-wise incidences for each sex were calculated for each age group for each month of 2020. Using delay impact on each stage the final results were calculated. Results: A total of 5004 life years would have been lost due to 448 deaths in the long term (40 months) attributed to the delays caused during March, April, May and June in Canada. The estimated incidence for all stages of lung cancer for these months was 9801 although the observed incidence was expected to be 6571 due to reduced screenings. Hence, it was within the missing 3231 cases that delays would occur. Over the short term (10 months) there are expected to be 151 early deaths and 273 deaths in the intermediate-term (20 months). Conclusions: This study using a mathematical model showed that in 2020, the COVID epidemic resulted in higher mortality and fewer lung cancer diagnoses in Canada. As a result of the delays in assessment, screening, and treatment that accompanied the pandemic lockdowns, there has been a rise in total life years lost due to lung cancer, demonstrating the pandemic’s huge impact on lung cancer patients.

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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.891

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.447
Teacher spread0.369 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Journal of EpidemiologySame topicCOVID-19 and healthcare impactsFrench-language works237,207