RADIOGRAPHIC DIAGNOSIS OF LUNG LOBE TORSION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clinical data, thoracic radiographs, ultrasonographic exams, and histopathologic reports in 13 dogs and two cats with confirmed lung lobe torsion were reviewed. Age of dogs ranged from 4 months to 11.5 years, (mean of 6.4 years) and several breeds of large and small dogs were represented. Right middle lobe torsion was predominant in large dogs (five of eight large breed dogs) and left cranial lobe torsion was more commonly seen in small dogs (three of five small-breed dogs). Two domestic short-hair cats, 10 and 14 years of age, had right cranial and right middle lobe torsion, respectively. Underlying thoracic disease was found in only five of 15 patients. On thoracic radiographs, increased lobar opacity and pleural effusion were found in all patients (100%). Small dispersed air bubbles were found within the affected lobe of 13 patients (87%). This pattern, which was the result of vesicular emphysema, was variably extensive, and became more evident on follow-up radiographs in five of six dogs. The lobar bronchi could be seen in only eight of 15 patients (54%), and appeared irregular, focally narrowed or blunted in six of the eight patients, and displaced in five of the eight. Other common radiographic findings included mediastinal shift (nine), curved and dorsally displaced trachea (seven), and axial rotation of the carina (seven). Ultrasonography was used in seven patients and considered generally useful, although variable signs were observed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".