MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W135673775

Ultrasound screening: how effective is the service?

2006· article· en· W135673775 on OpenAlexaff
Joan Lalor, Declan Devane, P Mc Parland

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound in Clinical Applications
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAuditService (business)Service delivery frameworkIrishMedical emergencyBusinessAccounting
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.315
Threshold uncertainty score0.334

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.246 · 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.

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

Citations5
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicUltrasound in Clinical ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207