Applying the syndemic framework to cancer research for effective cancer control in low- and middle-income countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cancer burden is increasing rapidly globally, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), which already face a double burden of infectious diseases and other non-communicable diseases (NCDs). LMICs also struggle with poor social determinants of health, leading to cancer health disparities, such as delayed diagnoses and increased death rates due to cancer. Contextually, relevant research needs to be prioritised in these regions to ensure feasible, evidence-based healthcare planning and delivery for cancer prevention and control. A syndemic framework has been used to study the disease clustering of infectious diseases and NCDs across varied social contexts to understand how diseases interact adversely and how the wider environmental context and other socioeconomic factors contribute to poor health outcomes within specific populations. We propose using this model to study the 'syndemic of cancers' in the disadvantaged population of LMICs and suggest ways for the clear operationalisation of the syndemic framework through multidisciplinary evidence-generation models for the delivery of integrated, socially conscious interventions for effective cancer control.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.030 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".