MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7014590571

Predictors of prostate cancer outcomes in Saskatchewan

2021· dissertation· en· W7014590571 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity Library (University of Saskatchewan) · 2021
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProstate cancerIncidence (geometry)Affect (linguistics)Cancer incidenceHealth careCancer registryCancer
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Prostate cancer (PCa) is one of the leading causes of cancer mortality and incidence in Canada. Saskatchewan has one of highest mortality and incidence rates in Canada, and this doctoral research explores possible reasons for the higher mortality and incidence rates in Saskatchewan compared to the other provinces. While reasons for these PCa outcomes are not known, we hypothesize healthcare access factors may influence PCa outcomes, including PCa incidence, treatment usage and time trends in Saskatchewan, and we hypothesize additional factors may affect PCa treatment decision-making. To explore these hypotheses, in this dissertation we study the following research questions: (1) “Is the PCa incidence in Saskatchewan affected by changes in family physician density, the remoteness level of where a patient lives, and the closest PCa assessment centre from where a patient lives?”; (2) “Are the PCa treatment utilization rates in Saskatchewan affected by changes in the remoteness level of where a patient lives and the closest PCa assessment centre from where a patient lives?”; (3) “Are the PCa time-to-treatment outcomes in Saskatchewan affected by changes in the remoteness level of where a patient lives and the closest PCa assessment centre from where a patient lives?”; and (4) “What factors and corresponding themes in the literature have been identified to affect the treatment decision-making of localized prostate cancer patients in Canada and the United States?”.\nMethods: To explore research questions one, two, and three, we used data from: (1) Saskatchewan Cancer Registry, (2) Statistics Canada’s Index of Remoteness, (3) Canadian Medical Association, and (4) Saskatchewan Covered Population. To explore research question four, we used data from: (1) MEDLINE, (2) EMBASE, (3) CINAHL, (4) AMED and (5) PsycInfo. For our first research question, we estimated the standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) of PCa and their associations with family physician density, remoteness level of where a patient lives and closest PCa assessment centre from where a patient lives in Saskatchewan using the Besag, York and Mollie (BYM) Bayesian method. For our second research question, we built multilevel generalized linear models to estimate the relationship between treatment choice and factors including remoteness level of where a patient lives and closest PCa assessment centre from where a patient lives. For our third research question, we conducted multivariable analysis to assess whether remoteness level of where a patient lives and closest PCa assessment centre from where a patient lives are associated with PCa time-to-treatment outcomes. For our fourth research question, we conducted a scoping review using the process of Arksey and O’Malley to identify key factors commonly studied in localized PCa treatment decision-making.\nResults: Family physician density was negatively associated with SIRs of metastatic PCa (IRR = 0.935; 95% CrI: 0.880 to 0.998]) and SIR of high-risk PCa (IRR = 0.927 ; 95% CrI: 0.880 to 0.975). We found that patients living in the rural areas have lower odds (OR = 0.59; 95% CI: 0.45 to 0.77; P < .001) of having surgery compared to patients living in the greater urban areas. RT diagnosis-to-treatment time was positively correlated with the remoteness-index (IRR = 1.45; 95% CI: 1.21 to 1.75; P < .001). Five themes in localized PCa treatment decision-making were identified: treatment type, socioeconomic characteristics, personal reasons, psychological experience, and involvement in the decision-making process.\nConclusions: Healthcare access factors were associated with PCa incidence, treatment choice and treatment delays in Saskatchewan. We found family physician density was negatively associated with incidence of high risk and metastatic PCa. There were regional disparities in PCa treatment choice and residents living in rural/remote areas were associated with delays for PCa treatment. We found five key factors associated with PCa treatment decision-making. This work informs future research and cancer care practices and policies to improve PCa patient outcomes in Saskatchewan and Canada.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.463
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.195 · 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.

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity Library (University of Saskatchewan)Same topicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207