MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Human Papilloma Virus-Associated Oral Pharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Prevalence, Prevention, and Awareness of Vaccination in the Indian Population

2023· review· en· W4378879822 on OpenAlexaff
Vigi Chaudhary, Naveen Kumar Chaudhary, Smitha Mathews, Ragini Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Reviews™ in Oncogenesis · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsSGS (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVaccinationCancerCervical cancerHead and neck cancerPopulationDiseaseOncologyHPV vaccinesHPV infectionHuman papilloma virusInternal medicineImmunologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human papilloma virus (HPV), one of the most common sexually transmitted infections, plays a pivotal role in head and neck cancer, primarily oral and oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinomas. HPV is a vaccine-preventable disease that also contributes to cervical cancer. Although HPV vaccination effectively protects the individual against all HPV-associated human carcinomas, the awareness of HPV vaccination and its acceptance is poor in developing nations like India. India has a very high burden of oral cancer, and, unfortunately, the morbidity and mortality rates are also high as the cancer is often detected at an advanced stage. In this review, we explore the prevalence of HPV-associated head and neck squamous cell carcinoma among the Indian population and the awareness of HPV vaccination among Indian youth. Since the prognosis for HPV-associated head and neck squamous cell carcinoma is good, early diagnosis of the cancer is crucial in improving the outcome of the treatment modalities. Efforts are needed to create and increase awareness of HPV vaccination. Routine screening for HPV infection in oral mucosa can prevent the silent epidemic from taking the lives of many young people.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.741
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.320 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations8
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Reviews™ in OncogenesisSame topicHead and Neck Cancer StudiesFrench-language works237,207