MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391734042 · doi:10.12775/jehs.2024.58.011

Basal cell carcinoma - the most common form of skin cancer. Methods of treatment

2024· article· en· W4391734042 on OpenAlexaff
Paweł Iwańczuk

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education Health and Sport · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNonmelanoma Skin Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsWiLAN (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBasal cell carcinomaSkin cancerBasal cellDermatologyMedicineCancerOncologyPathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Basal cell carcinoma is the most common form of skin cancer. The lifetime risk is estimated as 33% to 39% in white men and 23% to 28% in white women. Because of that it is a very crucial disease for public health. In this article will be described main pathways of treatment which are especially recommended and are the most wide used for different types of basal cell carcinoma. Main division of interventions type used in treatment of basal cell carcinoma are surgical (physical) and non-surgical (medical). Surgical (physical) includes surgical standard excision, Mohs micrographic surgery, curettage and cautery, cryosurgery and laser therapy (ablative lasers, pulsed dye lasers). Non-surgical (medical) includes radiotherapy, topical imiquimod, topical 5- fluorouracil, photodynamic therapy, intralesional interferon. Aim of study: Literature review of the most recommended treatment of basal cell carcinoma. State of knowledge: In this publication will be desribed a current state of knowledge about basic and the most crucial basal cell carcinoma treatment. Conclusion: Because of incidence rate of basal cell carcinoma which is very high- there are many reports about treatment of this disease. Treatment of this disease, especially among low risk patients, is very effective.

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 score0.219
Threshold uncertainty score0.755

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.396 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Education Health and SportSame topicNonmelanoma Skin Cancer StudiesFrench-language works237,207