MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

S5 Real-world evidence on the journey of lung cancer patients in England: delays in diagnosis and treatment

2024· article· en· W4404046467 on OpenAlexaff
Monica Mullin, XL Marston, J. Lavin, Ricky M. Thakrar

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLung cancerMedicineReal world evidenceCancerComputer scienceIntensive care medicineOncologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Lung Cancer (LC) is the most frequently diagnosed cancer worldwide. Timeliness in diagnosis is crucial, as delays contribute to worsened survival. Diagnostic delays can lead to unplanned healthcare utilisation, including A&E visits. In the UK, the National Lung Cancer Audit evaluates quality metrics. To improve LC care, this study was conducted to understand patterns in patients not meeting national goals in real-world settings. Methods Adult patients (≥ 18 years) diagnosed with LC (ICD-10: C34) between 1 April 2018 and 31 March 2019 were included. Linked data from Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) and the Diagnostic Imaging Database (DID) were used. Patients were excluded if they had another primary cancer or no records in DID prior to diagnosis. Records of chest imaging in the six months before diagnosis were extracted using OPCS-4 codes in HES and SNOMED, modality, or NICIP codes in DID. Presence of a code for imaging and a code for body part (i.e., chest) were both required. Treatments received within 12 months after diagnosis were analysed. Intervals were reported as median days and upper quartiles (75th percentile). Proportions of patients visiting A&E were reported. Results A total of 21,052 patients diagnosed with LC during the study period were included. Median time from first chest imaging to diagnosis was 56 days, with the upper quartile of 113 days. Almost half (46%) of patients had more than one chest X-ray and 17% had more than one CT scan before diagnosis. Median time from first chest imaging to treatment was 84 days, with the upper quartile of 136 days. A third (31%) were diagnosed via emergency presentation and more than half (53%) visited A&E between first imaging to treatment. Patients whose diagnosis took longer (> 56 days) had on average two A&E visits before treatment, compared to one visit in those diagnosed sooner (≤ 56 days). Conclusion Timeliness of LC care remains an ongoing concern and this research provides real-world evidence to understand disparities in diagnostic pathways. Prolonged time to diagnosis and treatment can lead to increased healthcare utilisation with repeated diagnostic imaging and unplanned A&E visits.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.075
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.107
Threshold uncertainty score0.213

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.075
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0450.002

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.342 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLung Cancer Treatments and Mutations→French-language works237,207→