Diagnóstico por imagem do tromboembolismo pulmonar agudo
Bibliographic record
Abstract
O diagnóstico do tromboembolismo pulmonar agudo é baseado na probabilidade clínica, uso do dímero D (quando disponível) e na avaliação por imagem. Os principais métodos de imagem utilizados no diagnóstico são representados por cintilografia ventilação-perfusão, angiografia pulmonar e tomografia computadorizada (TC). Na última década vários estudos têm demonstrado que a TC espiral apresenta elevada sensibilidade e especificidade no diagnóstico de tromboembolismo pulmonar agudo. Uma melhor avaliação das artérias pulmonares tornou-se possível com a recente introdução dos equipamentos de TC espirais com multidetectores. Vários pesquisadores têm sugerido que a angiografia pulmonar por TC espiral deve substituir a cintilografia na avaliação de pacientes com suspeita clinica de tromboembolismo pulmonar agudo. Os autores discutem os principais métodos de imagem utilizados no diagnóstico de tromboembolismo pulmonar agudo enfatizando o papel da TC espiral.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".