Chest pain: coronary CT in the ER
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cardiac CT has developed into a robust clinical tool during the past 15 years. Of the fields in which the potential of cardiac CT has raised more interest is chest pain in acute settings. In fact, the possibility to exclude with high reliability obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients at low-to-intermediate risk is of great interest both from the clinical standpoint and from the management standpoint. Several other modalities, with or without imaging, have been used during the past decades in the settings of new onset chest pain or in acute chest pain for both diagnostic and prognostic assessment of CAD. Each one has advantages and disadvantages. Most imaging modalities also focus on inducible ischaemia to guide referral to invasive coronary angiography. The advent of cardiac CT has introduced a new practice diagnostic paradigm, being the most accurate non-invasive method for identification and exclusion of CAD. Furthermore, the detection of subclinical CAD and plaque imaging offer the opportunity to improve risk stratification. Moreover, recent advances of the latest generation CT scanners allow combining both anatomical and functional imaging by stress myocardial perfusion. The role of cardiac CT in acute settings is already important and will become progressively more important in the coming years.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".