MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123464824 · doi:10.2214/ajr.10.6329

Risk-Benefit Analysis of Pulmonary CT Angiography in Patients With Suspected Pulmonary Embolus

2012· article· en· W2123464824 on OpenAlexaff
James K. H. Woo, Rita Y. W. Chiu, Yogesh Thakur, John R. Mayo

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Roentgenology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsVancouver General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAmbulatoryEmergency departmentPulmonary embolismPulmonary angiographyMortality rateRadiologyInternal medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to estimate the mortality benefit-to-risk ratio of pulmonary CT angiography (CTA) by setting (ambulatory [emergency department or outpatient] or inpatient), age, and sex. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective evaluation of 1424 consecutive pulmonary CTA examinations was performed and the following information was recorded: examination setting, patient age, patient sex, pulmonary CTA interpretation for pulmonary embolus (PE), and CT radiation exposure (dose-length product). We estimated mortality benefit of pulmonary CTA by multiplying the rate of positive pulmonary CTA examinations by published estimates of mortality of untreated PE in ambulatory and inpatient settings. We estimated the lifetime attributable risk of cancer mortality due to radiation from pulmonary CTA by calculating the estimated effective dose and using sex-specific polynomial equations derived from the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation VII report. We calculated benefit-to-risk ratios by dividing the mortality benefit of preventing a fatal PE by the mortality risk of a radiation-induced cancer. RESULTS: Pulmonary CTA diagnosed PE in 188 of 1424 patients (13.2%). Both inpatients (101/723, 14.0%) and emergency department patients (74/509, 14.5%) had significantly higher rates of PE than outpatients (13/192 [6.8%]). Males received significantly (p = 0.02451) higher radiation dose (9.7 mSv) than females (8.4 mSv), but males had a significantly (p < 0.0001) lower lifetime attributable risk of cancer mortality than females. Assuming an untreated PE mortality rate of 5% for ambulatory patients and 30% for inpatients, the benefit-to-risk ratio ranged from 25 for ambulatory patients to 187 for inpatients. Ambulatory women had the lowest benefit-to-risk ratio. CONCLUSION: The benefit-to-risk ratio of pulmonary CTA in patients with suspected PE ranges from 25 to 187 and can be increased by optimizing the radiation dose.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.616

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.219 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations55
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of RoentgenologySame topicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and ManagementFrench-language works237,207