MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384932877 · doi:10.3389/fmed.2023.1188038

National trends in incidence and geographic distribution of melanoma and keratinocyte carcinoma in the Russian Federation

2023· article· en· W4384932877 on OpenAlexaffabout
Anastasiya Muntyanu, Feras M. Ghazawi, Elena Pastukhova, Andrei Zubarev, Ivan V. Litvinov

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Medicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNonmelanoma Skin Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIncidence (geometry)Russian federationDistribution (mathematics)GeographyDermatologyMedicineOncologyRegional scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Keratinocyte Carcinomas (KC), including basal cell and cutaneous squamous cell carcinomas, are the most common skin cancers in Fitzpatrick phototype I-III individuals, while melanoma is one of the deadliest skin cancer types. The incidence of both melanoma and KC is increasing in Russia. KCs' incidence increases from north-to-south across the Russian Federation. In contrast, while melanoma's incidence increases from north-to-south in the eastern part of the country, in the west of Russia a reverse latitude gradient trend is noted, where northern more affluent regions of Russia display higher rates of melanoma than the southern jurisdictions. Furthermore, our detailed analysis of incidence by jurisdiction highlights that affluent northern capital cities have higher rates of melanoma than the surrounding regions. The observed melanoma incidence trends in the western portion of Russia are similar to the findings in the western Europe and opposite of the findings in Canada.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.118
Threshold uncertainty score0.235

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in MedicineSame topicNonmelanoma Skin Cancer StudiesFrench-language works237,207