MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393339865 · doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2024.114038

Essential data variables for a minimum dataset for head and neck cancer trials and clinical research: HNCIG consensus recommendations and database

2024· article· en· W4393339865 on OpenAlexaff
Sujith Baliga, Ahmad K. Abou‐Foul, Pablo Parente Arias, Petr Szturz, Juliette Thariat, Aditya Shreenivas, Paul Nankivell, Federica Bertolini, J. Biau, Dukagjin Blakaj, Sinéad Brennan, Aina Brunet, Thiago Bueno de Oliveira, Barbara Burtness, Alberto Carral Maseda, Velda Ling Yu Chow, Melvin L.K. Chua, Mischa de Ridder, S. Garikipati, Nobuhiro Hanai, Francis Ho, Shao Hui Huang, Naomi Kiyota, Konrad Klinghammer, Luiz Paulo Kowalski, Dora L.�W. Kwong, Lachlan McDowell, Marco Merlano, Sudhir Nair, Panagiota Economopoulou, Jens Overgaard, Amanda Psyrri, Silke Tribius, John Waldron, Sue S. Yom, Hisham Mehanna

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Cancer · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDelphi Technique in Research
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDelphiDatabaseDelphi methodData sharingData collectionHead and neck cancerComputer scienceMedicineMedical physicsCancerAlternative medicineStatisticsInternal medicinePathologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Head and Neck Cancer International Group (HNCIG) has undertaken an international modified Delphi process to reach consensus on the essential data variables to be included in a minimum database for HNC research. Endorsed by 19 research organisations representing 34 countries, these recommendations provide the framework to facilitate and harmonise data collection and sharing for HNC research. These variables have also been incorporated into a ready to use downloadable HNCIG minimum database, available from the HNCIG website.

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)0.047
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.431
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0470.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.709
GPT teacher head0.658
Teacher spread0.051 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of CancerSame topicDelphi Technique in ResearchFrench-language works237,207