MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011298876 · doi:10.1002/uog.1611

P14.11: Patient factors affecting the quality of routine second trimester obstetrical ultrasound images

2004· article· en· W2011298876 on OpenAlexaff
Katherine Fong, Vivian Y. Shin, Ants Toi, George Tomlinson

Bibliographic record

VenueUltrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Contraception
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGestational ageIntraclass correlationRank correlationBody mass indexUnivariate analysisObstetricsAbdomenSpearman's rank correlation coefficientUltrasoundProspective cohort studyGynecologySurgeryPregnancyRadiologyInternal medicineMultivariate analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To determine patient factors that affect US image quality, including the use of skin creams. This is a prospective observational study with institutional ethics approval. Women presenting for routine second trimester US scan were invited to complete a survey concerning their age, height, weight, ethnicity, previous abdominal surgery, and if skin cream was used on their abdomen, the frequency, last application and duration of use. Standard images from each case (BPD, cerebral ventricles, four chamber heart and abdominal circumference) were rated separately on a score of 1–5 (5-best) by two readers. Scoring was based on a previously agreed upon template. The readers were blinded to the patients' information. The average of the two readers' scores was calculated for each patient. Statistical analyses involved T-test, Spearman's rank correlation, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and multiple regression analysis. Between Dec. 30, 2003 and Feb. 4, 2004, we studied 92 women. Median maternal age was 32.3 years; median gestational age 19.2 weeks (17.6–23.9); median body mass index (BMI) 22.5 (15.0–40.9); 69 women (75%) used skin cream; 15 (16%) had lower abdominal surgery; and 74 (80%) were “white”. The average US score was 2.4. There was substantial agreement between the two readers (ICC = 0.75). In univariate analyses, US score was associated negatively with BMI (rank correlation = − 0.6; p < 0.0001) and previous surgery (P = 0.03) and positively with skin cream use (P = 0.004). In multiple regression analysis, statistically significantly higher US scores were seen with low BMI (p < 0.01); and “white” ethnicity (P = 0.02). Skin cream use, previous surgery and gestational age were not significant predictors of US score. Those with lower BMI were more likely to use creams. BMI and ethnicity were significant predictors of US image quality score. Adjusting for BMI, skin creams did not appear to significantly affect US quality.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUltrasound in Obstetrics and GynecologySame topicReproductive Health and ContraceptionFrench-language works237,207