MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156379305 · doi:10.1002/jmri.24810

MRI of cholangiocarcinoma

2014· review· en· W2156379305 on OpenAlex
Kartik Jhaveri, Hooman Hosseini‐Nik

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCholangiocarcinoma and Gallbladder Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsWomen's College HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntrahepatic CholangiocarcinomaMagnetic resonance imagingMedicineRadiologyHepatocellular carcinomaT2 weightedModality (human–computer interaction)PathologyInternal medicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cholangiocarcinomas are the second most common primary hepatobiliary tumors after hepatocellular carcinomas. They can be categorized either based on their location (intrahepatic/perihilar/extrahepatic distal) or their growth characteristics (mass-forming/periductal-infiltrating/intraductal) because they exhibit varied presentations and outcomes based on their location and or pattern of growth. The increased risk of cholangiocarcinoma in PSC necessitates close surveillance of these patients by means of imaging and laboratory measures; and because currently surgical resection is the only effective treatment for cholangiocarcinoma, the need for accurate pre-operative staging and assessment of resectability has emphasized the role of high quality imaging in management. Today magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the modality of choice for detection, pre-operative staging and surveillance of cholangiocarcinoma.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.976
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.294 · 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