MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055552397 · doi:10.1002/ca.20037

Demonstration of the appearance of the paraspinal musculoligamentous structures of the cervical spine using ultrasound

2005· article· en· W2055552397 on OpenAlexaff
Yee Leung, Mandy Roshier, Scott A. Johnson, R. W. Kerslake, Donal McNally

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Anatomy · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersUniversity of Nottingham
KeywordsMedicineUltrasoundCervical spineMagnetic resonance imagingAnatomyRadiologyCervical vertebraeSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The application of ultrasound in the imaging of the neck has primarily focussed on anterior structures (e.g., thyroid gland). Structures located on the posterior aspect of the neck have received little attention. This study illustrates the capability of modern ultrasound equipment in visualising the musculoligamentous structures of the neck, particularly the paraspinal musculature. Ten healthy adult volunteers (6 female; 4 male) underwent ultrasound examination of the cervical spine. A standardised technique for transducer placement was adopted and successive images of the neck of each subject were obtained. Spatial compound (extended field of view) images were obtained in subjects using one of two different ultrasound systems. Images of structures produced by ultrasound were compared to those achieved with magnetic resonance imaging in three subjects. Identification of key landmarks aided orientation and identification of structures. The internal architecture of the musculoligamentous structures of the cervical spine, especially the posterior neck muscles, was demonstrated well using ultrasound. Our study showed that modern ultrasound equipment is capable of producing clear images of the posterior cervical spine musculature and certain bony features.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.354 · 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
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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical AnatomySame topicSpinal Fractures and Fixation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207