Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our objective was to design and implement a clinical history database capable of linking to our database of quantitative results from <sup>99m</sup>Tc-mercaptoacetyltriglycine (MAG3) renal scans and export a data summary for physicians or our software decision support system. <b>Methods:</b> For database development, we used a commercial program. Additional software was developed in Interactive Data Language. MAG3 studies were processed using an in-house enhancement of a commercial program. The relational database has 3 parts: a list of all renal scans (the RENAL database), a set of patients with quantitative processing results (the Q2 database), and a subset of patients from Q2 containing clinical data manually transcribed from the hospital information system (the CLINICAL database). To test interobserver variability, a second physician transcriber reviewed 50 randomly selected patients in the hospital information system and tabulated 2 clinical data items: hydronephrosis and presence of a current stent. The CLINICAL database was developed in stages and contains 342 fields comprising demographic information, clinical history, and findings from up to 11 radiologic procedures. A scripted algorithm is used to reliably match records present in both Q2 and CLINICAL. An Interactive Data Language program then combines data from the 2 databases into an XML (extensible markup language) file for use by the decision support system. A text file is constructed and saved for review by physicians. <b>Results:</b> RENAL contains 2,222 records, Q2 contains 456 records, and CLINICAL contains 152 records. The interobserver variability testing found a 95% match between the 2 observers for presence or absence of ureteral stent (κ = 0.52), a 75% match for hydronephrosis based on narrative summaries of hospitalizations and clinical visits (κ = 0.41), and a 92% match for hydronephrosis based on the imaging report (κ = 0.84). <b>Conclusion:</b> We have developed a relational database system to integrate the quantitative results of MAG3 image processing with clinical records obtained from the hospital information system. We also have developed a methodology for formatting clinical history for review by physicians and export to a decision support system. We identified several pitfalls, including the fact that important textual information extracted from the hospital information system by knowledgeable transcribers can show substantial interobserver variation, particularly when record retrieval is based on the narrative clinical records.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".