A Systematic Review On The Prevalence Of Oral Cancer Among Tobacco And Non-Tobacco Users In Tamil Nadu
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Oral Cancer Is One Of The World's Most Common Types Of Cancer, With Delayed Diagnosis And Poor Prognosis. IndiaIs Among The Leading Countries With A High Rate Of Oral Cancer Due To Its Increased Tobacco Use Rate.Aim: This Study Aims To Assess The Prevalence Of Oral Cancer Among Tobacco And Non-Tobacco Users In Tamil Nadu.Materials And Method: A Systematic Review Of Cross-Sectional Studies Were Performed. The Data Was Searched Using ElectronicDatabases, And 376 Articles Were Screened. The Intervention And Outcomes Were Assessed In The Studies Included In TheSystematic Review. The Bias Assessment Done For The Article Was Based On The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.Results: Overall Analysis Of The Studies Shows That The Prevalence Of Oral Cancer In Tamil Nadu Has Been Significantly IncreasingAnd That Smokeless Tobacco Causes Oral Cancer Compared With Other Forms Of Tobacco.Conclusion: The Prevalence Of Oral Cancer In Tamil Nadu Is Increasing Significantly With The Usage Of The Increased Amount OfTobacco, And Awareness Of The Ill Effects Of Tobacco Usage May Considerably Decrease The Rates.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it