MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415760805 · doi:10.31344/ijhhs.v9i4.869

Trends, Risk Factors and Treatment of Common Cancers: Outcome of Hospital Based Survey Conducted in Dhaka, Bangladesh

2025· article· W4415760805 on OpenAlexaff
Abu Sadat Mohammad Nurunnabi, Mohammad Asaduzzaman, Mohammad Jahangir Alam, Sadia Nusrat Alamgir

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Human and Health Sciences (IJHHS) · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCancerLung cancerStomach cancerIncidence (geometry)Radiation therapyDiseaseChemotherapyChewing tobaccoColorectal cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: In Bangladesh, the estimated incidence of 12.7 million new cancer cases will rise to 21.4 million by 2030. Objective: The study aims to provide information about the common cancer types, predisposing risk factors and modalities of treatment among the Bangladeshi cancer patients. Methods: This cross-sectional, descriptive study was conducted between July and December of 2014, in different cancer hospitals located in Dhaka city, Bangladesh. Interviews were conducted based on a semi-structured questionnaire with 550 histopathologically confirmed cancer patients or patients having radio-pathological and clinical evidence of cancer (339 men and 211 women). Results: Among the male patients, the leading cancers were lung (23%), followed by mouth and oropharynx (16.52%), stomach (14.45%), colorectal (10.91%) cancers and others (35.12%). Among the female, breast cancer (31.75%) was the highest, followed by cancer of cervix (27.96%), ovary (18%), mouth and oropharynx (13.27%), stomach (4.74%) and others (4.28%). Among the risk factors of male cancer patients, tobacco smoking was considered highest (76.4%), followed by chewing betel leaf and nuts (61.65%) and chronic disease (58.4%). Among women, the attributable fraction of cancer causing by recurrent STDs (37.91%) was found as the highest, followed by obesity (36.97%), chronic disease (32.7%), chewing betel leaf and nuts (23.22%) and tobacco smoking (26.54%). Main treatment modalities were surgery, chemotherapy and radiotherapy applied either individually or in combination. Most of the patients received chemotherapy (54.72%), followed by chemotherapy with radiation (32%). Only 7.81% patients got palliative care. Conclusion: There are resource-strained oncology units in different public hospitals along with few private hospitals in Dhaka. However, this survey revealed that many patients lack access to cancer awareness programme, cancer screening facilities, availability of low-cost drugs, therapies and palliative care. Hence, promotion of health education, behavioural change communication and development of treatment facilities and manpower are recommended. International Journal of Human and Health Sciences Vol. 09 No. 04 Oct’25 Page: 252-256

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.083

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.447
Teacher spread0.324 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Human and Health Sciences (IJHHS)Same topicHead and Neck Cancer StudiesFrench-language works237,207