How often do neuroradiologists perform sonography of the carotid arteries? A survey of academic and nonacademic radiology practices, with implications for fellowship training.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Debate in the neuroradiology community surrounds the amount of formal training in sonography of the carotid arteries that should be provided to fellows. This study was designed to assess current practice patterns at both academic and nonacademic practices regarding the performance of carotid sonography. METHODS: A neurovascular radiology survey was sent to all 102 program directors of neuroradiology fellowships in the United States and Canada (academic practices). The survey was also sent to 146 randomly selected senior members of the ASNR (three per state, except one each for Alaska and Vermont) who were not affiliated with fellowship programs (nonacademic practices). RESULTS: Fifty-seven surveys from academic practices and 70 surveys from nonacademic practices were returned. Radiologists at academic practices performed approximately 42% of studies (general radiologists or sonography specialists, 36%; neuroradiologists, 5%; cardiovascular radiologists, 1%). Nonradiologists performed approximately 58% of studies (vascular surgeons, 47%; neurologists, 10%; cardiologists, 1%; neurosurgeons, <1%). Neuroradiologists performed carotid sonography at 11% (6/57) of academic practices. On average, radiologists at nonacademic practices performed approximately 62% of studies (general radiologists or sonography specialists, 38%; neuroradiologists, 15%; cardiovascular radiologists, 9%). Nonradiologists performed approximately 38% of studies (vascular surgeons, 25%; neurologists, 6%; cardiologists or internists, 6%). Neuroradiologists performed carotid sonography at 53% (37/70) of nonacademic practices. CONCLUSION: At most academic practices, neuroradiologists do not perform sonography of the carotid arteries. This may explain the reluctance of some fellowships to provide formal training in this technique. In contrast, although neuroradiologists perform carotid sonography at a majority of the nonacademic practices, the percentage of studies that they perform is small; moreover, neuroradiologists perform far fewer studies than do general radiologists or sonography specialists.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".