MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4300167047 · doi:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2022.09.051

Utilization of a rapid diagnostic centre during the COVID-19 pandemic reduced diagnostic delays in breast cancer

2022· article· en· W4300167047 on OpenAlexaff
Gary T.C. Ko, Sangita Sequeira, David R. McCready, Sharmy Sarvanantham, Nancy Li, Shelley Westergard, Vrutika Prajapati, Vivianne Freitas, Tulin Cil

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Surgery · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 and healthcare impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PandemicSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakBreast cancerMedicineCancerVirologyInternal medicineDiseaseInfectious disease (medical specialty)Outbreak

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Access to breast imaging was restricted during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. We assessed the impact of healthcare restrictions on the Gattuso Rapid Diagnostic Centre (GRDC) at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients seen at the GRDC between March 12 - August 31, 2020 and the corresponding period from 2019 was performed. RESULTS: There was an 18.6% decrease in patients seen at the GRDC (n = 429 in 2020 vs. 527 in 2019). Time from the first abnormal breast image to diagnosis was significantly shorter (17.4 days [IQR 13.0-21.8] in 2020 vs. 25.9 days [21.0-30.8] in 2019; p = 0.020) with no appreciable difference in time from diagnosis to consult or from consult to surgery. CONCLUSION: The GRDC enabled patients with concerning breast symptoms to access breast imaging, which helped to ensure timely treatment during the first wave of the pandemic.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.274 · 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
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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of SurgerySame topicCOVID-19 and healthcare impactsFrench-language works237,207