Comparison of Radiography and Computed Tomography for Determining Tracheal Diameter and Length in Dogs
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
OBJECTIVE: To compare radiographic and computed tomography (CT) measurements of tracheal size as would be made for the purpose of tracheal stent size selection. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-over. ANIMALS: Dogs (n = 15). METHODS: Canine cadavers without evidence of tracheal or respiratory disease were used for CT and digital radiography of the neck and thorax. Three observers each made 3 independent measurements at each of 5 tracheal locations, and also measured tracheal length, on each radiograph and for each CT scan on each cadaver. RESULTS: CT tracheal measurements were on average 1.03 mm larger (P < .01) compared with radiographic measurements for all 3 observers. CONCLUSIONS: Radiographic measurements of the canine trachea consistently underestimate tracheal size, and CT measurements are preferable for selecting tracheal stent size.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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