MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2216627854 · doi:10.1016/j.jrid.2015.11.010

Radiological findings of chest in patients with H7N9 avian influenza from a hospital

2015· article· en· W2216627854 on OpenAlexaff
Huanjie Ma, Zhijian Zhu, Yan Lin, Yuanyu Shen, Wei Hu, Wenbin Zheng, Guorui Liu, Hongjun Li, David J. Mikulis, Renhua Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiology of Infectious Diseases · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfluenza Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePleural effusionRadiologyLungPneumoniaRadiological weaponInfluenza A virus subtype H5N1Internal medicineVirus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To analyze the chest X-ray and computed tomography (CT) findings of human infection with avian-origin influenza H7N9 virus from a hospital. Chest X-ray or CT was performed in five patients with H7N9 avian influenza within 2 weeks after onset. The chest imaging data and characteristics of five patients were analyzed retrospectively. Abnormal findings were shown on chest X-ray and CT images in all of the patients. The main abnormal findings included ground-glass opacities (GGOs) in all five cases, consolidations with air bronchograms and pleural effusion in four patients. In the early onset of four patients, the right lobe was more commonly affected (particularly in the right lower lobes). Over the course of disease, the lesions were rapidly progressed to bilateral lungs, and from focal or multifocal to diffuse. Ipsilateral pleural effusion also appeared and developed with the coexisting consolidation. Imaging findings closely reflected the overall clinical progression and severity of the disease. With the right lower lobe prominence, the main abnormal findings in H7N9 pneumonia include rapidly progressive GGOs, consolidations with air bronchograms, and pleural effusion. CT imaging may provide a more accurate assessment of the lung pathology with H7N9 avian influenza, helping the early diagnosis and monitoring its progression.

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 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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.609

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiology of Infectious DiseasesSame topicInfluenza Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207