MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123564837 · doi:10.1097/mcp.0b013e3280f3bff4

Radiological imaging in pneumonia: recent innovations

2007· review· en· W2123564837 on OpenAlexaff
Sat Sharma, Bruce Maycher, Gregg Eschun

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Pulmonary Medicine · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound in Clinical Applications
Canadian institutionsSt. Boniface HospitalUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRadiological weaponPneumoniaIntensive care medicineRadiological imagingMedical physicsRadiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Pneumonia is one of the major infectious diseases responsible for significant morbidity and mortality throughout the world. Radiological imaging plays a prominent role in the evaluation and treatment of patients with pneumonia. This paper reviews recent innovations in the radiologic diagnosis and management of suspected pulmonary infections. RECENT FINDINGS: Chest radiography is the most commonly used imaging tool in pneumonias because of availability and an excellent cost-benefit ratio. Computed tomography is mandatory in unresolved cases or when complications of pneumonia are suspected. A specific radiologic pattern can suggest a diagnosis in many cases. Bacterial pneumonias are classified into four main groups: community-acquired, aspiration, healthcare-associated and hospital-acquired pneumonia. The radiographic patterns of community-acquired pneumonia may be variable and are often related to the causative agent. Aspiration pneumonia involves the lower lobes with bilateral multicentric opacities. The radiographic patterns of healthcare-associated and hospital-acquired pneumonia are variable, most commonly showing diffuse multifocal involvement and pleural effusion. SUMMARY: Combination of pattern recognition with knowledge of the clinical setting is the best approach to the radiologic interpretation of pneumonia. Radiological imaging will narrow the differential diagnosis of direct additional diagnostic measures and serve as an ideal tool for follow-up examinations.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.004

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 head0.321
GPT teacher head0.518
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations95
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in Pulmonary MedicineSame topicUltrasound in Clinical ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207