Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1985, Dr Eric Milne successfully launched the first issue of the Journal of Thoracic Imaging. This inaugural issue was a visionary symposium devoted to state-of-the-art reviews of what were then considered “new” techniques for imaging the thorax, including digital radiography, high-resolution computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography. Twenty-five years later, these same previously “new” techniques now comprise the mainstay of thoracic imaging. It is interesting to reflect on the many technological advances and new applications that have been developed for these techniques during the past quarter of a century. With this in mind, I would like to bring to your attention a series of special commentaries in which leading experts in these areas consider the articles from the inaugural issue and comment upon advances that have occurred during the past 25 years. As we celebrate the 25th anniversary of the Journal this year, we will also be reporting the perspectives of cardiopulmonary radiologists from across the globe regarding their reflections on the past 25 years of our specialty and their predictions for the next 25 years. The first of this 4-part series entitled “25 on 25” is introduced in this issue, with 25 luminaries responding to the question: “What is the most influential article or advance in our specialty in the past 25 years?” I invite you, our readers, to share your views in our new “quick poll” feature at www.thoracicimaging.com. The history of the Journal is closely tied to the major thoracic imaging societies, whose members have contributed to the Journal as editors, editorial board members, reviewers, contributing authors, and readers. It is thus appropriate that the Society of Thoracic Imaging, the Japanese Society of Thoracic Radiology, the Korean Society of Thoracic Radiology, the European Society of Thoracic Imaging, and the Fleischner Society have all contributed historical articles to this issue. These articles document the rich histories of these organizations and their invaluable contributions to the field. An anniversary issue would not be complete without a consideration of the history of the Journal itself, including the many people who have contributed to its development and operations throughout the years. Toward this end, this issue includes an article devoted to the history of the Journal of Thoracic Imaging that was contributed by Otha Linton, a highly regarded journalist with expertise in writing histories of radiologic organizations. This issue marks not only the end of the Journal's first 25 years but also the beginning of its next quarter century. It is thus fitting that this issue not only looks back, but also moves forward by debuting an expanded format with 20 pages of web-exclusive content. Beginning with this issue, case reports will now be exclusively published electronically, thereby providing additional pages in the printed version of the Journal for more symposia articles, original scientific articles, and other content. The past 25 years have been an exciting time for our specialty and for the Journal. It is my hope that this issue appropriately honors this important milestone, acknowledges the past, and affirms the Journal's strong future. Now, and throughout the coming year, I invite you to join me in looking back at the remarkable advances of the past 25 years and in looking forward to exciting new ones!
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 | 0.009 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.018 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.009 |
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".