Abstract 1287: The ACCESS consortium: Advancing childhood cancer experience, science and survivorship in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In Canada, >4,300 children, adolescents and young adults are diagnosed with cancer each year. 1/3 have refractory/metastatic disease or will relapse with an expected 5-year survival rate of <15%. The prognosis for most pediatric cancers has stagnated in the past 30 years and Canada trails the US and Europe in providing accessible clinical trials and improved outcomes. Advocacy for change by patients and families led to a federal government investment of $30M in pediatric cancer research. $23M was allocated to establishing a national pediatric cancer consortium. “ACCESS: advancing childhood cancer experience, science and survivorship” is the new multi-stakeholder network created with a vision that every Canadian child with cancer has access to the latest scientific advances, diagnostic tools, therapies and supportive care leading to better outcomes and quality of life. ACCESS will connect the Canadian pediatric cancer community, build partnerships, leverage research and clinical expertise across cancer types and ages, implement transformative change and create a unified national strategy. To date, >350 clinicians, researchers, policymakers, advocates, people with lived experience (PWLE; patients, families and survivors) and other stakeholders have been engaged, with a goal of representing Canada’s ethno-cultural, socioeconomic and geographic diversity. ACCESS is building partnerships between children, families, professionals, and existing programs to collaborate in coordinated research and knowledge mobilization. The goal is to implement transformative change in the delivery of fair, fast, effective and safe cancer care for all Canadian children. ACCESS has developed a statement of its values that includes patient/survivor and family centred; collaborative; anti-oppressive; innovation and excellence; accountable. Uniquely, ACCESS is an interdisciplinary and inclusive organization that directly engages and collaborates with PWLE at all levels of research and governance. ACCESS is organized into 7 themes that will address gaps, advance research and educate through all phases of the pediatric cancer journey: cancer biology; clinical trials; access to innovative therapies and optimal care; regulation, policy and economics; education and training; ethical, legal, societal implications and implementation science; and psychosocial and survivorship. In addition, there are two cross cutting groups focusing on Knowledge mobilization and Social justice, Indigenization and Inclusion. Collaborations with local, provincial, national and international initiatives are being established through the development of a partnership strategy. Cross-consortium priorities are being implemented, and a data management strategy is in development. The publication of a strategic and sustainability plan for ACCESS is anticipated in 2024. Citation Format: Christine J. Williams, Stephanie A. Grover, Adrienne Co-Dyre, David Malkin, James A. Whitlock, on behalf of the ACCESS consortium. The ACCESS consortium: Advancing childhood cancer experience, science and survivorship in Canada [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2024; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2024 Apr 5-10; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(6_Suppl):Abstract nr 1287.
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 | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.001 |
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".