MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413105818 · doi:10.1093/noajnl/vdaf123.115

RMTD-09 ‘CORE OUTCOME SET’ FOR LEPTOMENINGEAL DISEASE (LEPTOCOS): A MULTI-DISCIPLINARY, INTERNATIONAL, CONSENSUS EFFORT

2025· article· en· W4413105818 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmad Ozair, LeptoCOS Collaborators, Alireza Mansouri

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuro-Oncology Advances · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDelphi Technique in Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialSystematic reviewClinical trialMedical physicsFamily medicineIntensive care medicineMEDLINEPathologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract BACKGROUND Leptomeningeal disease (LMD) represents a stage of metastatic cancer when tumor cells have seeded the leptomeninges and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF)-containing subarachnoid space. Despite decades of efforts by the neuro-oncology community, response assessment remains challenging, and the prognosis of this whole neuroaxial disease remains extremely poor, ranging typically between 3-8 months despite standard of care therapy. The extensive heterogeneity in outcomes observed in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for LMD has been thoroughly documented by prior consensus reviews and systematic reviews, warranting the development and implementation of a standardized core outcome set (COS) for LMD. Objective: This ongoing project aims to develop a COS for LMD (LeptoCOS) through a multidisciplinary, international effort, following current methodological recommendations. METHODS The LeptoCOS collaborative has been established in order to develop COS for use in clinical effectiveness trials of LMD, including RCTs and NRTs, through a collaboratorship framework working with multiple stakeholder groups and to help drive its global adoption. This project has been pre-registered with Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET ID 3224) database: https://www.comet-initiative.org/Studies/Details/3224. COS are being developed following Core Outcome Set–Standards for Development (COS-STAD) and COMET guidelines, with pre-registration in COMET database. Long-list of outcomes of potential relevance are being generated based on updated systematic review of published literature and searches of trial registries (rapid review). After eDelphi process and consensus meetings with various stakeholders, short-list of outcomes will be generated for inclusion and the final LeptoCOS. With the endorsement of professional societies and non-profit organizations, this effort will help standardize the use and reporting of outcomes reported in future clinical studies of LMD, thereby enabling efficient evidence synthesis.

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 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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.889
Threshold uncertainty score0.953

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.222
GPT teacher head0.554
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuro-Oncology AdvancesSame topicDelphi Technique in ResearchFrench-language works237,207