Physical Functioning in Resectable Cancer of the Pancreas – Protocol for A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<ns3:p> Background Pancreatic resection in combination with adjuvant chemotherapy is the standard of care for resectable cancer of the pancreas and increasingly neoadjuvant chemotherapy is being utilised for those with borderline resectable disease. However, high co-morbidity rates are associated with these regimens and can lead to resultant physical decline. A previous review by this group highlighted that the role of physical function in resectable cancer of the pancreas has been underexplored. This updated systematic review aims to explore the physical functioning of patients with resectable cancer of the pancreas and explore its impacts on disease management. Methods A search strategy encompassing EMBASE, Medline OVID, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and Web of Science was developed and refined in consultation with subject librarians. The review will be conducted using the COVIDENCE systematic review management system. Screening of titles, abstracts, and full texts along with data extraction, risk of bias and GRADE assessment will be conducted by two independent reviewers, with a third reviewer available to resolve disagreements by consensus. Discussion Results of this systematic review will provide clinicians in the field with updated evidence regarding the role of physical functioning in the management of resectable cancer of the pancreas. Registration <ns3:ext-link xmlns:ns4="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="uri" ns4:href="https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251020095">https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251020095</ns3:ext-link> . </ns3:p>
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 | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".