MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Lung Cancer – 1986

2023· article· en· W4385622696 on OpenAlexaff
Ronald Feld

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Brasileira de Cancerologia · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLung cancerCancerMedicineAsbestosIncidence (geometry)Cause of deathDiseaseBreast cancerOncologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the United States, lung cancer is the most frequent site of cancer in men (22%) and tied for the third most common site (uterus) in women based on the 1986 estimated cancer incidence. It is the most frequent cause of cancer death in men (35%) and 1986 estimates suggest it is the most frequent cause of cancer death in women (19%), shghtly greater than breast cancer (18%). Although the cause of lung cancer is almost certainly muitifactorial, the most importante factor is clearly tobacco use. There is a very high frequency of this malignant tumour in smokers; in addition, there appears to be a passive effect with an increased incidence in the occupants of households exposed to smokers. Asbestos and other occupational materials may also play a part in this disease.

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)0.000
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 score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.685

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.311 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Brasileira de CancerologiaSame topicLymphoma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207