Ultrasound screening: how effective is the service?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study describes the standards, training and audit systems in units offering ultrasound screening services in Ireland. A national survey of 21 of all maternity units offering an obstetric ultrasound service in Ireland was undertaken. The questionnaire used was designed by the UK Screening committee and sought information on nine key areas associated with service provision including protocols for screening, the antenatal ultrasound package available and management following the identification of a fetal abnormality. This paper reports on the availability of information for women, record keeping, standards and training, and monitoring of quality. All units responded to the survey. Deficiencies in the Irish service include limited information available for women who are participating in screening, poor monitoring of ultrasound programmes, suboptimal equipment and a lack of guidelines and standards relating to the conduct of ultrasound examinations Significant improvements are required in order to deliver a national service of a satisfactory standard. Key recommendations include establishing a national working group to develop national standards to audit the service, and to guarantee that staff training is sufficient to ensure effective practice.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.038 | 0.171 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".