MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037265653 · doi:10.1515/dx-2013-0031

The current and ideal state of anatomic pathology patient safety

2014· article· en· W2037265653 on OpenAlexaff
Stephen S. Raab

Bibliographic record

VenueDiagnosis · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPathologyProcess (computing)CognitionMedicineIdeal (ethics)PsychologyMedical physicsCognitive scienceNeuroscienceComputer scienceEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An anatomic pathology diagnostic error may be secondary to a number of active and latent technical and/or cognitive components, which may occur anywhere along the total testing process in clinical and/or laboratory domains. For the pathologist interpretive steps of diagnosis, we examine Kahneman's framework of slow and fast thinking to explain different causes of error in precision (agreement) and in accuracy (truth). The pathologist cognitive diagnostic process involves image pattern recognition and a slow thinking error may be caused by the application of different rationally-constructed mental maps of image criteria/patterns by different pathologists. This type of error is partly related to a system failure in standardizing the application of these maps. A fast thinking error involves the flawed leap from image pattern to incorrect diagnosis. In the ideal state, anatomic pathology systems would target these cognitive error causes as well as the technical latent factors that lead to error.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.900
Threshold uncertainty score0.202

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations4
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiagnosisSame topicClinical Laboratory Practices and Quality ControlFrench-language works237,207