MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evolution of Diagnostic Neuroradiology from 1904 to 1999

2000· article· en· W2111890260 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Norman E. Leeds, Stephen A. Kieffer

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuroradiologyMedicineNeuroradiologistPneumoencephalographyRadiologyInterventional neuroradiologyMagnetic resonance imagingCerebral angiographyAngiographyNuclear medicineNeurology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neuroradiology began in the early 1900s soon after Roentgen discovered x rays, with the use of skull radiographs to evaluate brain tumors. This was followed by the development of ventriculography in 1918, pneumoencephalography in 1919, and arteriography in 1927. In the beginning, air studies were the primary modality, but this technique was supplanted by angiography in the 1950s and 1960s. The first full-time neuroradiologist in the United States was Cornelius G. Dyke at the New York Neurological Institute in 1930. Neuroradiology took a firm hold as a specialty in the early 1960s when Dr Juan M. Taveras brought together fourteen neuroradiologists from the United States and Canada to establish the nucleus of what was to become the American Society of Neuroradiology, or ASNR. This society's initial goals were to perform research and to advance knowledge within the specialty. Neuroradiologists initially were able to diagnose vascular disease, infections, tumors, trauma, and alterations in cerebrospinal fluid flow, because the brain structure was invisible. Neuroradiology was forever changed with computed tomography (CT) because the brain structure became visible. Soon thereafter, magnetic resonance (MR) imaging was developed, and it not only provided anatomic but also made possible vascular and physiologic functional imaging.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.294
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 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

Citations65
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiologySame topicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular DisturbancesFrench-language works237,207