MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405261220 · doi:10.1177/00031348241307399

Closing the Distance: A Qualitative Study to Identify Equitable Innovations for Rural Thyroid Cancer Treatment

2024· article· en· W4405261220 on OpenAlex
Hattie H. Huston-Paterson, Yifan Mao, Elena G Hughes, Iuliana Bobanga, James X. Wu, Michael W. Yeh

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Surgeon · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThyroid Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThyroid cancerQualitative researchClosing (real estate)FrontierMedicineRural areaCancerGeographySociologyPolitical scienceInternal medicinePathologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BackgroundPatients residing in rural and frontier areas experience worse thyroid cancer outcomes than those in urban areas. This novel qualitative study sought the perspectives of rural surgeons to identify practical measures that could mitigate the disparities in thyroid cancer care between rural and urban contexts.MethodsWe contacted general and head and neck surgeons at all of California's Critical Access Hospitals (n = 35), which are remote, rural hospitals, and requested self-referral to our study through the American College of Surgeons. We performed semi-structured qualitative interviews with surgeons at rural hospitals to understand the assets and vulnerabilities of rural hospitals in providing the highest quality care to patients with thyroid cancer. Responses were coded and analyzed using mixed-methods qualitative analysis methodology.ResultsRural surgeons (n = 13) from a geographically diverse sample of states and regions (AK, AR, CA, NE, NC, NM, TX, UT, WY, and Newfoundland) participated. All initially trained in general surgery; 46% had fellowship training (15% in endocrine surgery) and performed a median of 8.5 thyroidectomies annually.Rural surgeons from all training backgrounds felt adequately trained to treat thyroid cancer and reported a strong desire to provide comprehensive thyroid cancer care. Most reported patients' strong preference to be treated near home. Key challenges to local, comprehensive thyroid cancer care included limited or no access to medical endocrinology, lack of continuing education on thyroid cancer management, and professional isolation in decision-making. Interviewed rural surgeons identified connections with university health systems, expert colleagues, and telemedicine consultations as valuable assets in treating thyroid cancer in geographically isolated hospitals.DiscussionThis study identified key challenges and clear avenues for interventions in treating rural thyroid cancer patients. Interviewed rural surgeons specifically suggest improving access to endocrinology specialists, developing educational initiatives on thyroid cancer management, and fostering connections and collaborations with urban colleagues to reduce professional isolation.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.324
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.395 · 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