MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416589127 · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(25)00520-0

SISAQOL-IMI consensus-based guidelines to design, analyse, interpret, and present patient-reported outcomes in cancer clinical trials

2025· review· en· W4416589127 on OpenAlexafffund
Cecilie Delphin Amdal, Ragnhild Sørum Falk, Ahu Alanya, Michael Schlichting, Satrajit Roychoudhury, Vishal Bhatnagar, Lisa M. Wintner, Antoine Regnault, Anders Ingelgård, Corneel Coens, Saskia le Cessie, Bernhard Holzner, Jane Chang, Paul Cislo, Johannes M. Giesinger, Joseph C. Cappelleri, Vivek Pawar, Silène Ten Seldam, Elektra J. Papadopoulos, Melanie Calvert, Kenth Louis Hansen Joseph, Andrew Bottomley, Ingolf Griebsch, Juan Ignacio Arrarás, Guro Lindviksmoen Astrup, Ethan Basch, Andrej Belančić, Michael Brundage, Alicyn Campbell, Khadija Rantell, Kim Cocks, Nathan I. Cherny, Sonya Eremenco, Montse Ferrer, Mallorie H. Fiero, Christoph Gerlinger, Els Goetghebeur, Ulrich Grouven, Olalekan Lee Aiyegbusi, Abigirl Machingura, Junki Mizusawa, Geert Molenberghs, Morten Aagaard Petersen, Jaap C. Reijneveld, Gerhard Rumpold, Claudia Rutherford, Chantal Quinten, Kavita Sail, Maxime Sasseville, Willi Sauerbrei, Anja Schiel, Ashley Wilder Smith, Claire Snyder, Galina Velikova, Xin S. Wang, Kristin Bjordal, Madeline Pe

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Oncology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsHealth CanadaUniversity Health NetworkQueen's University
FundersHealth CanadaHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeU.S. Food and Drug AdministrationNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthEuropean Medicines AgencyEuropean Society for Medical OncologyEuropean CommissionInnovative Health InitiativeEuropean Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and AssociationsAmerican Society of Clinical Oncology
KeywordsClinical trialQuality (philosophy)Selection (genetic algorithm)Quality of life (healthcare)CancerAlternative medicineMEDLINE

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)0.262
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.349
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.738
Threshold uncertainty score0.910

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2620.349
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0210.035
Bibliometrics0.0190.016
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0140.005
Open science0.0200.011
Research integrity0.0130.020
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.014

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 head0.547
GPT teacher head0.609
Teacher spread0.062 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
DomainMethods
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

Citations11
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueThe Lancet OncologySame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207