Relationship of Adherence to Cervical Cancer Treatment Guideline Towards Patients’ Five-year Survival: Systematic Review of Follow-up Trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Novianti Qurnia Putri,1 Tiara Bunga Mayang Permata,1 Ni Ayu Wulandari,1 Handoko,1 Endang Nuryadi,1 Gatot Purwoto,2 Soehartati Argadikoesoema Gondhowiardjo1 1Department of Radiation Oncology, Dr. Cipto Mangunkusumo National General Hospital, Faculty of Medicine Universitas Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia; 2Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Dr. Cipto Mangunkusumo National General Hospital, Faculty of Medicine universitas Indonesia, Jakarta, IndonesiaCorrespondence: Soehartati Argadikoesoema Gondhowiardjo Tel/Fax +62 21-3926288Email gondhow@gmail.comAbstract: Cervical cancer is the one of the most common gynecology malignancies in the world. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines on cervical cancer are widely adopted as national guidelines and clinical practice guidelines. These guidelines are constantly being updated but their effectiveness has not been questioned. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review to assess outcomes with/without guideline adherence in the published studies. This systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA statement. Searching with strategy on PubMed, ProQuest, Scopus, and Wiley databases resulted in three studies that met all criteria, thus assessed further with Newcastle-Ottawa scale, and assessed qualitatively. All three studies adopt NCCN guidelines. We found that the proportion of adherence to cervical cancer treatment guidelines was low, ranging from 42% to 54%, with violations occurring at various clinical stages. One study stated that early stage cervical cancer was more likely to receive guideline adherence (adjusted OR=5.48; 95%CI: 1.94– 15.5; p=0.001) than advanced stage. There was a higher five-year survival of cervical cancer patients in the guideline-adhering group than in the nonadhering group. In all three studies, survival in the adherent group was reported as big as 88%, 79%, and 93%, respectively, compared to nonadherent group with 56%, 78%, and 88.1%respectively (p< 0.05). One study stated that adherence to guidelines could reduce cervical cancer mortality on stage I and II by 0.22 times (p< 0.05). As the conclusion, adherence to guidelines increases survival rates. In the early stages, there are differences in survival.Keywords: intraepithelial, neoplasia, squamous, cell, recommendation
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.022 | 0.105 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.016 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".