MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100506883 · doi:10.1586/14779072.2014.965148

Impact of SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging on cardiac care

2014· editorial· en· W2100506883 on OpenAlexaff
Peter Lugomirski, Benjamin J.W. Chow, Terrence D. Ruddy

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Cardiovascular Therapy · 2014
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCoronary artery diseasePerfusionMyocardial perfusion imagingSingle-photon emission computed tomographyPerfusion scanningModality (human–computer interaction)CADEmission computed tomographyRadiologyCardiologyInternal medicineNuclear medicineArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Single photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging is a powerful modality for the assessment of coronary artery disease. It is useful in the diagnosis of CAD, prognostication of CAD and the determination of viability. It acts as guide for therapy and has the ability to assess effectiveness of therapy. The use of SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging has also been shown to be cost-effective compared to other modalities in cardiology.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.176
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.019
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations6
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of Cardiovascular TherapySame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207