MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383481940 · doi:10.1002/pbc.30550

Reevaluation of sodium thiosulfate otoprotection using the consensus International Society of Paediatric Oncology Ototoxicity Scale: A report from the Children's Oncology Group study ACCL0431

2023· article· en· W4383481940 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

VenuePediatric Blood & Cancer · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEar and Head Tumors
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
FundersNational Institute on Deafness and Other Communication DisordersNational Institutes of HealthNational Cancer InstituteSt. Baldrick's Foundation
KeywordsMedicineSodium thiosulfateOtotoxicityOncologyRandomized controlled trialScale (ratio)Clinical trialInternal medicineClinical OncologyCisplatinChemotherapyCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In two randomized trials (Children's Oncology Group ACCL0431 and International Childhood Liver Tumour Strategy Group SIOPEL-6), sodium thiosulfate (STS) demonstrated efficacy in preventing cisplatin-induced hearing loss (CIHL). However, the measures used in those trials have been superseded by the consensus International Society of Paediatric Oncology (SIOP) Ototoxicity Scale. To provide benchmark data for STS efficacy when using this contemporary scale, we reanalyzed ACCL0431 hearing outcomes with the SIOP scale and using multiple timepoints. Compared to the control arm, STS significantly reduced CIHL when assessed by the SIOP scale across these different approaches. These results provide critical data to inform treatment discussions and support future potential trial designs comparing otoprotectants.

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)0.002
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.319 · 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