MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4404153540 · doi:10.37766/inplasy2024.11.0030

Impact of the ratio of visceral fat to subcutaneous fat area on the prognosis of patients with colorectal cancer

2024· report· en· W4404153540 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shufu Hou, Dandan Song, Ning Ma

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubcutaneous fatVisceral fatColorectal cancerMedicineInternal medicineCancerOncologyGastroenterologyAdipose tissueObesity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

assessment;Funnel plot, egger's test and begger's' test were used to assess the risk of bias. Strategy of data synthesisWe will search, with no time restrictions, the following databases for relevant English language literature: pubmed; Embase;cochrane library.The search string will be built as follows:(visceral subcutaneous Fat ratio) AND ((colorectal cancer) OR (rectal cancer) OR (colon cancer)). Subgroup analysisWe considered a subgroup analysis of patient age, region, and sample size of the article. Sensitivity analysisThe sensitivity was analyzed by excluding one article one by one. Country(ies) involvedChina.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.005
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 topicNutrition and Health in Aging→French-language works237,207→