The correlative study on doppler ultrasound ,chest photograph and cardiac catheterization in diagnosing pulmonary hypertension
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective:To explore the correlation of doppler ultrasound,chest photograph and cardiac catheterization in diagnosing pulmonary hypertension.Methods:47 cases were examined by cardiac catheterization.RAP,RVP,PP were recorded.At the same time the maximal regurgitation′ speed of tricuspid was measured by ultrasound doppler(V).PAPS was calculated with V.Meanwhile thoracic P-A position was taken to measure pulmonary artery segment basic line (P 1),pulmonary artery segment process (P 2) and right lower pulmonary trunk width (P 3).The value of Cardiac catheterization as a standard (ΔP A) were compared respectively with the result of ΔP s,ΔP 1,ΔP 2,ΔP 3.Results:The results of pulmonary artery pressure measuered by cardiac catheterization and ultrasound Doppler and chest radiography had obvious correlation.Conclusion:Doppler ultrasound has the most correlation to cardiac catheterization.Pulmonary artery segment process is the best method among the methods of chest radiography.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".