Burden of General Surgical Cancer Care in West Africa: A Review of the Literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The global burden of cancer is growing rapidly, with a disproportionately higher increase in low- and middle-income countries. West Africa is particularly affected by this rise, where cancer control systems are woefully inadequate to meet the increasing needs of patients. Although many gaps exist across the continuum of cancer care, perhaps the most striking is the lack of surgical services, which plays a vital role in up to 80% of all patients with cancer. To address this critical gap in cancer care, the West African College of Surgeons established a bilateral partnership with Queen's University, Canada, to grow the surgical oncology workforce for the region by cocreating and implementing a general surgical oncology fellowship training program. METHODS: To inform the design of the curriculum tailored to the cancer care needs of West Africa, a narrative review of the literature was performed to identify the incidence and mortality associated with general surgical cancers in the region, as well as the health care resources available to address these malignancies. RESULTS: This comprehensive report provides a contemporary understanding of the landscape of cancer care with respect to the burden of disease, the existing resources, and the challenges in delivery of cancer services for West Africa. CONCLUSION: The findings in this report quantify the unmet demand for cancer care in West Africa and highlight the scope for context-specific cancer training in this region.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".