MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125996658 · doi:10.5430/jbgc.v5n1p11

Computed tomography findings of acute abdomen: a pictorial essay

2014· article· en· W2125996658 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomedical Graphics and Computing · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAppendicitis Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAbdomenAcute abdomenPresentation (obstetrics)EtiologyComputed tomographyRadiological weaponIntervention (counseling)RadiologyAcute abdominal painAbdominal painSurgeryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Acute abdomen can be defined as a clinical condition often requires emergency surgical therapy and characterized by severeabdominal pain with tenderness that develops over a short period of time, generally less than 24 hours. There are a variety ofconditions that can present clinically with acute abdomen such as: inflammatory, vascular, mechanic, traumatic. In many cases,the clinical presentation is similar, independent of etiology. The radiological imaging plays very important role to determine theneed for operative intervention and initiate appropriate therapy. Our aim is to describe the computed tomography findings of themost common conditions of acute abdomen excluding trauma and pediatric or obstetric patients.

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 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)0.000
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 score0.368
Threshold uncertainty score0.401

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.249 · 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