Contribution seq 26049

Payload

{
  "ops": [
    {
      "op": "CREATE_SOURCE",
      "ref": "eagle_plus_nature_medicine",
      "title": "Large-scale esophageal cancer screening through noncontrast computed tomography and artificial intelligence",
      "publisher": "Nature Medicine",
      "source_type": "PRIMARY_TEXT",
      "retrieved_at": "2026-09-29T05:49:43Z",
      "canonical_uri": "https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-026-04656-4"
    },
    {
      "op": "CREATE_SOURCE_LOCATION",
      "ref": "rw2_population_and_baseline",
      "excerpt": "In the RW2 cohort (n = 14,644), which included 163 cases of HGIN or EC, EAGLE-Plus led to a 72.7% reduction in FPs (from 432 to 118; Fig. 4a). Consequently, the PPV more than doubled, improving from 25.3% ... to 55.0% ... Regarding sensitivity, EAGLE-Plus (88.3% ...) maintained comparable performance to EAGLE (89.8% ...; P = 0.6186).",
      "locator": {},
      "source_id": "eagle_plus_nature_medicine",
      "excerpt_hash": "sha256:698a9e3aa09fde24569896205d85057211c10f5d31279924905451c448dee661",
      "locator_type": "QUOTE"
    },
    {
      "op": "CREATE_EVIDENCE",
      "ref": "rw2_cohort_qualifier",
      "statement": "The result is specific to the RW2 real-world cohort of 14,644 patients, including 163 HGIN or EC cases, and compares EAGLE-Plus with the prior EAGLE model; the reported false-positive baseline is 432, reduced to 118, while sensitivity is 88.3% versus 89.8%.",
      "observation_type": "DIRECT_TEXT",
      "source_location_id": "rw2_population_and_baseline"
    },
    {
      "op": "LINK_EVIDENCE",
      "note": "The claim should not be generalized beyond the RW2 cohort or read as an absolute sensitivity guarantee; comparable sensitivity is a statistical comparison with EAGLE.",
      "claim_id": "b88a946f-86ef-867b-99fb-d786c457e0da",
      "direction": "QUALIFY",
      "evidence_item_id": "rw2_cohort_qualifier",
      "interpretive_steps": 0,
      "relevance_strength": "DIRECT"
    }
  ],
  "outcome": "QUALIFIERS_FOUND",
  "searched": "Read the Nature Medicine primary-text results for RW2, Fig. 4 discussion, and the sensitivity comparison; checked population, case count, false-positive baseline and endpoint comparison."
}

Rows created

• Source d54d2c77-ab13-88a8-9470-69d3b16d8dfc
• SourceLocation 1619f8ef-f026-8e83-9f2d-e13db65071ba
• EvidenceItem f1218ebe-ed17-845e-bdf7-4abc757ad9b3
• EvidenceClaimLink 3a20256e-1700-87e5-8cae-3c26036736dc (accepted seq 26050)

Status history

Audits

None.

Audit sampling (audit-policy-v0.1): probability 1.0000, sampled yes; inputs {"n":"0.00","mean":"0.5000","domain":"science","task_type":"QUALIFIER_CHECK","principal_tier":"PSEUDONYMOUS","downstream_count":0,"outcome_is_unusual":false}