MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412940520 · doi:10.3390/curroncol32080436

Implementing Person-Centered, Clinical, and Research Navigation in Rare Cancers: The Canadian Cholangiocarcinoma Collaborative (C3)

2025· article· en· W4412940520 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Samar Attieh, Leonard Angka, Christine Lafontaine, Cynthia Mitchell, Julie Carignan, Carolina S. Ilkow, Simon Turcotte, Rachel Goodwin, Rebecca C. Auer, Carmen G. Loiselle

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCholangiocarcinoma and Gallbladder Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMcGill UniversityCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalCanadian Patient Safety InstituteOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCholangiocarcinoma Foundation
KeywordsMultidisciplinary approachPsychosocialMedicineContext (archaeology)Collaborative networkCollaborative CareHealth professionalsClinical trialHealth careKnowledge managementPrimary careFamily medicineComputer sciencePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Person-centered navigation (PCN) in healthcare refers to a proactive collaboration among professionals, researchers, patients, and their families to guide individuals toward timely access to screening, treatment, follow-up, and psychosocial support. PCN-which includes professional, peer, and virtual guidance, is particularly crucial for rare cancers, where affected individuals face uncertainty, limited support, financial strain, and difficulties accessing relevant information, testing, and other services. The Canadian Cholangiocarcinoma Collaborative (C3) prioritizes PCN implementation to address these challenges in the context of Biliary Tract Cancers (BTCs). C3 uses a virtual PCN model and staffs a "C3 Research Navigator" who provides clinical and research navigation such as personalized guidance and support, facilitating access to molecular testing, clinical trials, and case reviews through national multidisciplinary rounds. C3 also supports a national network of BTC experts, a patient research registry, and advocacy activities. C3's implementation strategies include co-design, timely delivery of support, and optimal outcomes across its many initiatives. Future priorities include expanding the C3 network, enhancing user engagement, and further integrating its innovative approach into routine care.

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)0.046
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.055
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score0.417

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0460.055
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0100.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0030.013
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.291
GPT teacher head0.512
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent OncologySame topicCholangiocarcinoma and Gallbladder Cancer StudiesFrench-language works237,207