MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008526162 · doi:10.1117/12.877843

Transforming medical imaging applications into collaborative PACS-based telemedical systems

2011· article· en· W2008526162 on OpenAlexaff
Rouzbeh Maani, Sergio Camorlinga, Neil Arnason

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDigital Radiography and Breast Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkflowComputer scienceUsabilityMedical imagingArchitectureMultimediaPicture archiving and communication systemSystems architectureHuman–computer interactionArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Telemedical systems are not practical for use in a clinical workflow unless they are able to communicate with the Picture Archiving and Communications System (PACS). On the other hand, there are many medical imaging applications that are not developed as telemedical systems. Some medical imaging applications do not support collaboration and some do not communicate with the PACS and therefore limit their usability in clinical workflows. This paper presents a general architecture based on a three-tier architecture model. The architecture and the components developed within it, transform medical imaging applications into collaborative PACS-based telemedical systems. As a result, current medical imaging applications that are not telemedical, not supporting collaboration, and not communicating with PACS, can be enhanced to support collaboration among a group of physicians, be accessed remotely, and be clinically useful. The main advantage of the proposed architecture is that it does not impose any modification to the current medical imaging applications and does not make any assumptions about the underlying architecture or operating system.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicDigital Radiography and Breast ImagingFrench-language works237,207