MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312212178 · doi:10.1002/cncy.22678

The 2021 ASCO guideline on the management of salivary gland malignancy endorses FNA biopsy and the risk stratification scheme proposed by the Milan System for Reporting Salivary Gland Cytopathology

2022· article· en· W4312212178 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Cytopathology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSalivary Gland Tumors Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGuidelineCytopathologySalivary glandFine-needle aspirationBiopsySalivary gland cancerMalignancyPathologyCytology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 2021 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) guideline for the management of salivary gland cancer offers 47 evidence‐based recommendations on preoperative evaluations, diagnostic and therapeutic surgical procedures, radiotherapy, systemic therapy, follow‐up evaluations, and recurrent metastatic disease. The ASCO guideline provides a framework and the best current evidence for managing the care of patients with salivary gland malignancies from diagnosis to treatment, and it endorses fine‐needle aspiration biopsy and the new Milan System for Reporting Salivary Gland Cytopathology.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.102
Threshold uncertainty score0.939

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.273 · 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