MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039315062 · doi:10.1007/s13244-013-0294-0

Solid malignant retroperitoneal masses—a pictorial review

2013· article· en· W2039315062 on OpenAlexaff
Cressida Brennan, Dilkash Kajal, Korosh Khalili, Sangeet Ghai

Bibliographic record

VenueInsights into Imaging · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSoft tissue tumor case studies
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalWomen's College HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNeuroradiologyRadiologyMagnetic resonance imagingUltrasoundInterventional radiologyBiopsyComputed tomographyNeurology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Primary retroperitoneal masses are a rare but important group of neoplasms. Cross-sectional imaging has revolutionised the investigation of patients with retroperitoneal neoplasms. Both computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can contribute to tumour diagnosis, though histological confirmation is often required because of the considerable overlap of imaging features. Cross-sectional imaging is key to the pre-operative staging and planning of retroperitoneal masses, though ultrasound may also help in certain instances. Imaging also helps to select and guide the site to biopsy from these usually large and heterogeneous neoplasms. This article aims to review many of the primary retroperitoneal neoplasms that may be encountered by the radiologist.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.004

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.302 · 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
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

Citations47
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInsights into ImagingSame topicSoft tissue tumor case studiesFrench-language works237,207