Pulmonary Hypertension: How the Radiologist Can Help
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pulmonary hypertension is defined as an abnormal elevation of pressure in pulmonary circulation, with a mean pulmonary arterial pressure higher than 25 mmHg, regardless of the underlying mechanism. The clinical classification system for pulmonary hypertension was updated at the fourth World Symposium on Pulmonary Hypertension in Dana Point, California, in 2008. In patients with suspected pulmonary hypertension, the diagnostic approach includes four stages: suspicion, detection, classification, and functional evaluation. It is crucial to understand the advantages and disadvantages of the different imaging tools available for the diagnostic work-up and follow-up of patients with pulmonary hypertension. Many conditions that cause pulmonary hypertension have suggestive findings at multidetector computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging; some causes may be surgically treatable, whereas others may demonstrate adverse reactions to vasodilator therapies used during the course of treatment. Therefore, the radiologist plays an important role in evaluating patients with this disease. Supplemental material available at http://radiographics.rsna.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1148/rg.321105232/-/DC1.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it