Scintigraphic Probability and Angiographic Diagnostic Certainty in Acute Pulmonary Embolism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objectives of this study were to determine if diagnostic certainty on angiography correlates with scintigraphic probability for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism. From a total of 160 consecutive patients who underwent both nuclear imaging and invasive selective pulmonary angiography, we reviewed the xenon-133 ventilation images in 2 posterior oblique views and the Tc-99m macroaggregated serum albumin perfusion scans and angiograms of 40 patients (15 men, 25 women; average age 57 years) who were discharged from the hospital on anticoagulants with a diagnosis of pulmonary embolism. The angiograms were reviewed and the diagnosis of embolism was considered certain in the presence of an intraluminal filling defect, a trailing embolus, or a branch occlusion equal to or larger than a segmental branch (n=29; 73%), and uncertain when the studies were reinterpreted as either equivocal or negative or in the presence of a single, small subsegmental filling defect of questionable clinical significance. The ventilation-perfusion scans were read as high (n=18; 45%), intermediate (n=10; 25%), or low (n=12; 30%) probability. The proportion of patients with diagnostic certainty on angiography in the high-, intermediate-, and low-probability scintigraphic subgroups was, respectively, 100% (18 of 18), 70% (7 of 10), and 33% (4 of 12) (P=0.004). In patients diagnosed with pulmonary embolism based on selective angiography, a lower probability of pulmonary embolism on ventilation-perfusion scintigraphy correlates with a lesser degree of diagnostic certainty on angiography and a higher incidence of single subsegmental emboli.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".