MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051103123 · doi:10.1097/md.0000000000000167

Objective CT-Based Quantification of Lung Sequelae in Treated Patients With Paracoccidioidomycosis

2014· article· en· W2051103123 on OpenAlexaff
Matheus Alvarez, Diana Rodrigues de Pina, Marcela de Oliveira, Sérgio Marrone Ribeiro, Rinaldo Pôncio Mendes, S. B. Duarte, José Ricardo de Arruda Miranda

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFungal Infections and Studies
Canadian institutionsRPM International (Canada)
FundersCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível SuperiorFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo
KeywordsMedicineParacoccidioidomycosisHigh-resolution computed tomographyLungRadiologyVoxelComputed tomographyNuclear medicinePathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study presents methodology for objectively quantifying the pulmonary region affected by emphysemic and fibrotic sequelae in treated patients with paracoccidioidomycosis. This methodology may also be applied to any other disease that results in these sequelae in the lungs.Pulmonary high-resolution computed tomography examinations of 30 treated paracoccidioidomycosis patients were used in the study. The distribution of voxel attenuation coefficients was analyzed to determine the percentage of lung volume that consisted of emphysemic, fibrotic, and normal tissue. Algorithm outputs were compared with subjective evaluations by radiologists using a scale that is currently used for clinical diagnosis.Affected regions in the patient images were determined by computational analysis and compared with estimates by radiologists, revealing mean (± standard deviation) differences in the scores for fibrotic and emphysemic regions of 0.1% ± 1.2% and -0.2% ± 1.0%, respectively.The computational results showed a strong correlation with the radiologist estimates, but the computation results were more reproducible, objective, and reliable.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.291

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 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

Citations10
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicineSame topicFungal Infections and StudiesFrench-language works237,207