MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123280177 · doi:10.1503/cmaj.050925

New imaging techniques for diagnosing coronary artery disease

2006· review· en· W2123280177 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Esteban Escolar, Guy Weigold, Anthon Fuisz, Neil J. Weissman

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Association Journal · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering
KeywordsCoronary artery diseaseMedicineRadiologyIntravascular ultrasoundMagnetic resonance imagingCADLumen (anatomy)Coronary arteriesComputed tomographic angiographyCoronary angiographyAngiographyArteryInternal medicineMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

New tomographic cardiovascular imaging tests, such as intravascular ultrasonography (IVUS), coronary computed tomography (CT) angiography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), can be used to assess atherosclerotic plaques for the characterization and early staging of coronary artery disease (CAD). Although IVUS images have very high resolution capable of revealing very early preclinical CAD, it is an invasive technique used clinically only in conjunction with a coronary intervention. Multiple-slice coronary CT angiography, which is noninvasive, shows promise as a diagnostic method for CAD. New 64-slice cardiac CT technology has high accuracy for the detection of lesions obstructing more than 50% of the lumen, with sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values all better than 90% in patients without known CAD. Cardiac MRI is also improving accuracy in coronary plaque detection and offers a better opportunity for plaque characterization. With further advances in tomographic imaging of coronary atheromas, the goal will be to detect plaques earlier in the development of CAD and to characterize the plaques most likely to generate a clinical event.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.560
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.294 · 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

Citations74
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Association JournalSame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207