MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414035571 · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(25)00327-4

Target volume delineation of the neck for radiotherapy in nasopharyngeal carcinoma: CSTRO, CACA, CSCO, HNCIG, ESTRO, and ASTRO guidelines and contouring atlas

2025· review· en· W4414035571 on OpenAlexafffund
Ling‐Long Tang, Cheng‐long Huang, Shaojun Lin, Quynh‐Thu Le, Brian O’Sullivan, Sue S. Yom, Shao Hui Huang, Annie W. Chan, Nancy Y. Lee, Michael Benedict A. Mejia, Yong Chan Ahn, Kenneth C.W. Wong, Lachlan McDowell, Ester Orlandi, Jeppe Friborg, Yu‐Pei Chen, Koichi Yasuda, Takeshi Kodaira, Alexander C. Whitley, Ann D. King, Gregorius Ben Prajogi, Ezra Hahn, Jin‐Ching Lin, Naomi Kiyota, Victor Lee, Pengjie Ji, Ying J. Hitchcock, F. Hoebers, Pierre Blanchard, Sung Ho Moon, Wan Zamaniah Wan Ishak, Kevin J. Harrington, Kun-Yu Yang, A. Dimitrios Colevas, Anna F. Lee, Chaosu Hu, David I. Rosenthal, Farzan Siddiqui, Johannes A. Langendijk, Jinyi Lang, Junlin Yi, Liangfang Shen, Ji-Bin Li, Li-Zhi Liu, Anne W.M. Lee, Hai‐Qiang Mai, Melvin L.K. Chua

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Oncology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
FundersGuangzhou Municipal Health and Family Planning CommissionChinese Society of Clinical OncologySun Yat-sen University Cancer CenterOverseas Expertise Introduction Project for Discipline InnovationNational Medical Research CouncilNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaHigher Education Discipline Innovation ProjectAmerican Society for Radiation OncologyCanadian Cancer SocietyGOH FoundationNational Cancer Centre of Singapore
KeywordsContouringNasopharyngeal carcinomaMedicineAtlas (anatomy)Radiation therapyNuclear medicineMedical physicsRadiologyAnatomyComputer scienceComputer graphics (images)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations8
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueThe Lancet OncologySame topicHead and Neck Cancer StudiesFrench-language works237,207