MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309720505 · doi:10.3389/fonc.2022.991485

Secondary preventing effect of lung cancer in non-high-risk population: A retrospective investigation of opportunistic screening with low-dose computed tomography in Wuhan

2022· article· en· W4309720505 on OpenAlexaff
Zhiqiang Zhou, Chun Qiu, Shangkun Liu, Shaofang Wang, Danning Wang, Hui Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Oncology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLung cancer screeningLung cancerRetrospective cohort studyPopulationLungComputed tomographyRadiologySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Given the mortality benefit of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening on high-risk populations, the retrospective investigation intended to identify the benefits of LDCT on lung cancer screening among the general demographic cohorts. Methods: We used an opportunistic screening with LDCT implemented during the pandemic in Wuhan to study the impact on subsequent thoracic surgeries, especially surgeries for lung cancer. Patients who received LDCT from October 1, 2019, to July 31, 2020, in three Triple-A accredited hospitals in Wuhan were included in the study. Relative week volumes of both surgeries before and after the chest LDCT screening were compared pairwise. The counts of surgeries for pulmonary nodules or masses, and corresponding pathological results among different gender and age groups were also compared. Result: The relative weekly volumes of thoracic surgery were significantly greater than those of stomach surgery after the opportunistic screening with LDCT. They were 33% (95% CI, 0.20-0.46; p<0. 001) higher than those of stomach surgery. For every 1,000 chest LDCT scans conducted in a given week, on average, 3.52(95% CI,0.56-6.49, p =0.03) thoracic surgeries were performed in the following week. After the implementation of opportunistic screening with LDCT, there was a higher percentage of young females with pulmonary nodule or mass (64.4% vs. 45.8%, p = 0.032). The fraction of lung cancer surgery in the treatment period was significantly greater than that in the control period (74.09% vs. 68.79%, p=0.007). There was a higher percentage of stage I lung cancer surgery in young and mid-age females than in the senior age group (64% vs. 53%, p= 0.05). Interpretation: Opportunistic screening with LDCT can advance the early diagnosis window of lung cancer in non-high-risk populations, especially young women who are easy to be ignored.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in OncologySame topicLung Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207