MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161000996 · doi:10.1177/1708538115584727

Reply to letter to editor: Audible handheld Doppler ultrasound determines reliable and inexpensive exclusion of significant peripheral arterial disease

2015· letter· en· W2161000996 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.

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

Bibliographic record

VenueVascular · 2015
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPeripheral Artery Disease Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePeripheralArterial diseaseDoppler ultrasoundPeripheral arterial occlusive diseaseDoppler effectCardiologyRadiologyInternal medicineVascular disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Our study was designed as a screening test to offer anadditionaloptiontothebedsideportableDopplerAnkleBrachial Pressure Index (ABPI). ABPI is a difficult testto perform where an active ulcer is present over the areaof blood pressure cuff occlusion, when severe local painlimits the ability to perform the ABPI test or the vesselsare non-compressible (often in persons with diabetes)due to calcification with an ABPI level of greater than1.3. In our recent study, audible handheld Dopplerultrasound (AHDU) is a reliable simple bedside toolfor the screening of peripheral arterial disease with aspecificity of 97.5% and a negative predictive value of94.1%. The inter-rater reliability of the test performedbythephysicianandthenurseperformingAHDUintheclinic was very high with 87.5% agreement. Althoughthe sensitivity of the test is only 42.8%, it is a screeningtest that combined with physical findings to determinethe need for further vascular laboratory assessment.The study by Mustapha et al.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.299
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.231 · 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