Low-Dose Nonenhanced Helical CT of Renal Colic: Assessment of Ureteric Stone Detection and Measurement of Effective Dose Equivalent
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate a low-dose, nonenhanced helical computed tomographic (CT) protocol in the detection of ureteric stones and measure the associated effective dose equivalent (H(E)) of radiation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty patients suspected of having renal colic and referred by emergency department physicians underwent nonenhanced helical CT with 7-mm collimation and a 2:1 pitch and then conventional intravenous urography (IVU). The two studies were prospectively and independently interpreted. The diagnostic accuracy of CT for ureteric stone detection was determined by comparing the scans with the IVU images and with a combination of clinical, surgical, and other imaging findings. The radiation risk from typical CT and IVU examinations (five images) was measured in terms of H(E) and compared with the estimated risk from two previously reported CT protocols. RESULTS: CT correctly depicted 36 of 37 ureteric stones, and one false-positive case was recorded, for a sensitivity of 97%, specificity of 96%, and accuracy of 97%. The H(E) for our CT protocol was determined to be 2.8 mSv, which is about double that for IVU and about 75% and 50% of that for two previously reported CT protocols. CONCLUSION: Our low-dose CT protocol is superior to IVU and clinically adequate for diagnosis of renal colic.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".