MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399068281 · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(24)00038-x

Addressing challenges in low-income and middle-income countries through novel radiotherapy research opportunities

2024· review· en· W4399068281 on OpenAlexaff
May Abdel–Wahab, C. Norman Coleman, Jesper Grau Eriksen, Peter Lee, Ryan Kraus, Ekaterina Harsdorf, Becky Lee, Adam P. Dicker, Ezra Hahn, Jai Prakash Agarwal, Pataje G.S. Prasanna, Michael MacManus, Paul Keall, Nina A. Mayr, Barbara Alicja Jereczek‐Fossa, Francesco Giammarile, In Ah Kim, Ajay Aggarwal, Grant Lewison, Jiade J. Lu, Douglas Guedes de Castro, Feng‐Ming Kong, Haidy Afifi, Hamish Sharp, Verna Vanderpuye, Tajudeen Olasinde, Fadi Atrash, Luc Goethals, Benjamin W. Corn

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Oncology · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvances in Oncology and Radiotherapy
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilNational Institutes of HealthAssociazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul CancroAstellas PharmaCancer Institute NSWEuropean SocieTy for Radiotherapy and OncologyNational Cancer InstituteAccurayAustralian GovernmentFondazione Istituto Europeo di Oncologia e Centro Cardiologico MonzinoHuntsman Cancer Institute
KeywordsLow and middle income countriesLow incomeBusinessEconomic growthEconomicsDemographic economicsDeveloping country

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although radiotherapy continues to evolve as a mainstay of the oncological armamentarium, research and innovation in radiotherapy in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) faces challenges. This third Series paper examines the current state of LMIC radiotherapy research and provides new data from a 2022 survey undertaken by the International Atomic Energy Agency and new data on funding. In the context of LMIC-related challenges and impediments, we explore several developments and advances-such as deep phenotyping, real-time targeting, and artificial intelligence-to flag specific opportunities with applicability and relevance for resource-constrained settings. Given the pressing nature of cancer in LMICs, we also highlight some best practices and address the broader need to develop the research workforce of the future. This Series paper thereby serves as a resource for radiation professionals.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.938
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.623
GPT teacher head0.565
Teacher spread0.058 · 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.

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

Citations22
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Lancet OncologySame topicAdvances in Oncology and RadiotherapyFrench-language works237,207