MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2163442901 · doi:10.1164/rccm.201104-0624oc

Detection of Pulmonary Emboli With 99mTc-Labeled Anti–D-dimer (DI-80B3)Fab′ Fragments (ThromboView)

2011· article· en· W2163442901 on OpenAlexaff
Timothy A. Morris, Michael Gerometta, Roger D. Yusen, Richard H. White, James D. Douketis, Scott Kaatz, Richard Smart, David Macfarlane, Jeffrey S. Ginsberg

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePulmonary embolismNuclear medicineConfidence intervalRadiologyProspective cohort studyRespiratory diseaseLungInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RATIONALE: We report a new method to diagnose acute pulmonary embolism (PE) by single photon emission computerized tomography (SPECT) after administration of (99m)Tc-labeled anti-D-dimer (DI-80B3) monoclonal antibody Fab' fragments. This novel technique provides an additional approach to diagnosing PE in patients for whom other methods are nondiagnostic or contraindicated. OBJECTIVES: We performed a prospective, multicenter study to investigate the sensitivity and specificity of (99m)Tc-DI-80B3/SPECT in patients with suspected acute PE. METHODS: Subjects with a moderate to high clinical probability of PE or a positive D-dimer test underwent a PE-protocol contrast-enhanced multidetector thoracic computed tomography (CT) scan as well as (99m)Tc-DI-80B3/SPECT (0.5 mg (99m)Tc-DI-80B3 intravenously followed by a thoracic SPECT 2.5 h later). Separate and independent adjudication committees, blinded to clinical data and other test results, interpreted the (99m)Tc-DI-80B3/SPECT scans (PE detected as foci of abnormally increased (99m)Tc uptake) and the thoracic CT scans using Prospective Investigation of Pulmonary Embolism Diagnosis II criteria. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of the 52 patients who were enrolled and completed both tests, 42 had both evaluable SPECT scans and thoracic CT scans. Using the criterion standard (thoracic CT scan) there were 21 patients with PE and 21 without. (99m)Tc-DI-80B3/SPECT had a sensitivity of 76.2% (95% confidence interval, 52.8-91.8%) and a specificity of 90.5% (95% confidence interval, 69.8-98.8%). Treatment-related serious adverse events did not occur. CONCLUSIONS: (99m)Tc-DI-80B3/SPECT was sensitive and specific for acute PE in subjects with moderate to high clinical probability of PE or a positive D-dimer test. (99m)Tc-DI-80B3/SPECT demonstrated an acceptable safety profile and avoids exposure to contrast.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine→Same topicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management→French-language works237,207→