MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2295085248 · doi:10.1117/1.jbo.21.1.016007

Intraoperative imaging of pediatric vocal fold lesions using optical coherence tomography

2016· article· en· W2295085248 on OpenAlexafffund
Fouzi Benboujja, Jordan Garcia, Kathy Beaudette, Mathias Strupler, Christopher J. Hartnick, Caroline Boudoux

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomedical Optics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Coherence Tomography Applications
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsOptical coherence tomographyLaryngoscopyMedicineLarynxBiomedical engineeringLesionTomographyMedical imagingIn vivoPreclinical imagingRadiologyPathologyAnatomySurgeryIntubation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Optical coherence tomography (OCT) has been previously identified as a promising tool for exploring laryngeal pathologies in adults. Here, we present an OCT handheld probe dedicated to imaging the unique geometry involved in pediatric laryngoscopy. A vertical cavity surface emitting laser-based wavelength-swept OCT system operating at 60 frames per second was coupled to the probe to acquire three-dimensional (3-D) volumes in vivo. In order to evaluate the performance of the proposed probe and system, we imaged pediatric vocal fold lesions of patients going under direct laryngoscopy. Through this in vivo study, we extracted OCT features characterizing each pediatric vocal fold lesion, which shows a great potential for noninvasive laryngeal lesion discrimination. We believe OCT vocal fold examination in 3-D will result in improved knowledge of the pediatric anatomy and could aid in managing pediatric laryngeal diseases.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.261
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 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

Citations24
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biomedical OpticsSame topicOptical Coherence Tomography ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207