MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Analysing the colorectal cancer screening patterns during the COVID-19 pandemic and their effects on patient outcomes.

2023· article· en· W4388204075 on OpenAlexaffabout
Joshua Ling, Justin Kang, Daniel Read, Vivek Singh Parmar, Fawad Ahmed, Caroline Hamm

Bibliographic record

VenueJCO Oncology Practice · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WindsorWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWindsorColorectal cancerCancerPandemicCancer screeningMesotheliomaInternal medicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)DiseasePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

40 Background: In Canada, colorectal cancer (CRC) ranks as the third most prevalent cancer and second leading cause of cancer mortality (1). The potential to prevent a significant proportion of colorectal cancers and associated mortality through effective screening is widely acknowledged (Han-Mo Chiu, 2021). Notably, fecal immunohistochemistry testing (FIT) has led to improved early detection of CRC (2). However, FIT screening was suspended in Canada in the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic response. Specifically, in Ontario, the collection of FIT samples was suspended between March 23rd, 2020 and August 26th, 2020 (3). During this 3-month period, an estimated 540,000 Canadians would have participated in screening, as indicated by OncoSim, a microsimulation model for cancer (4). The primary objective was to evaluate the consequences of screening cessation, through comparison of asymptomatic and symptomatic CRC diagnoses at the Windsor Regional Cancer Centre in Windsor, Ontario. Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed for patients admitted to the Windsor Regional Cancer Centre of Windsor Regional Hospital between December 2016 and June 2021. Demographic data, risk factors for CRC, cancer operability status, and the presence of symptoms at diagnosis of CRC were recorded. Results: 771 patient charts were reviewed and 77 (10%) were excluded due to duplication or insufficient chart data. Of the remaining 694 patients, 545 (79%) were classified as the pre-COVID group (December 2016 to February 2020) and 149 (21%) as the COVID group (March 2020 to June 2021). We found a 2.5% increase in symptomatic diagnoses of CRC in patients diagnosed after March 2020 (pre-COVID group vs. COVID group). However, we did not observe a significant difference in proportion of inoperable CRC cases between groups. Conclusions: The observed trend of symptomatic diagnoses of CRC underscores the importance of FIT screening for early CRC detection and the need for increased catch-up screening to mitigate the potential risks and mortality associated with CRC screening interruptions. For this, it is presumed that a population of patients exists who would have tested positive through FIT screening but instead presented symptomatically at a later stage of the disease. It is also important to note that our study data did not extend beyond June 2021, so we could not capture the complete impact of FIT cessation. (1) Canadian Cancer Statistics, 2021. (2) Zauber, 2015. (3) Ontario Health, 2021. (4) StatCan, 2021.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.286
Threshold uncertainty score0.607

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.330 · 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJCO Oncology PracticeSame topicColorectal Cancer Screening and DetectionFrench-language works237,207