MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003671186 · doi:10.1148/rg.256045013

Sonographic Examination of the Carotid Arteries

2005· review· en· W2003671186 on OpenAlexaff
H. Tahmasebpour, Anne R. Buckley, P L Cooperberg, Cathy H. Fix

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiographics · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases
Canadian institutionsVancouver General HospitalSt. Paul's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCarotid endarterectomyRadiologyStenosisCarotid artery diseaseOcclusionDoppler effectHemodynamicsCarotid arteriesGold standard (test)Cardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ultrasonography (US) of the carotid arteries is a common imaging study performed for diagnosis of carotid artery disease. In the United States, carotid US may be the only diagnostic imaging modality performed before carotid endarterectomy. Therefore, the information obtained with carotid US must be reliable and reproducible. Technical parameters that can affect the accuracy of carotid US results include the Doppler angle, sample volume box, color Doppler sampling window, color velocity scale, and color gain. Important factors in diagnosis of atherosclerotic disease of the extracranial carotid arteries are the intima-media thickness, plaque morphology, criteria for grading stenosis, limiting factors such as the presence of dissection or cardiac abnormalities, distinction between near occlusion and total occlusion, and the presence of a subclavian steal. Challenges to the consistency of carotid US results may include lack of a standard protocol, poor Doppler technique, inexperience in interpretation of hemodynamic changes reflected in the Doppler waveform, artifacts, and physical challenges. Hindrances in the classification of problematic carotid artery stenoses may be overcome by following a standard protocol and optimizing scanning techniques and Doppler settings.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations178
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiographicsSame topicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery DiseasesFrench-language works237,207