MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2727770663 · doi:10.3747/co.24.3478

Multidisciplinary Retroperitoneal and Pelvic Soft-Tissue Sarcoma Case Conferences: The Added Value that Radiologists Can Provide

2017· article· en· W2727770663 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Robert Lim, Ania Z. Kielar, R. H. El-Maraghi, Margaret Fraser, Carolyn Nessim, Seng Thipphavong

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsRoyal Victoria Regional Health CentreUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInferior vena cavaRadiologyMultidisciplinary teamSoft tissue sarcomaLeiomyosarcomaVignetteMultidisciplinary approachAbdominal painSarcomaComputed tomographyEmergency departmentGeneral surgerySoft tissueSurgeryPathologyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clinical Vignette: A 50-year-old woman presents to the emergency department with increasing abdominal pain. Abdominal computed tomography imaging reveals an expanded inferior vena cava-filling defect that is suspicious for a retroperitoneal sarcoma, possibly a primary leiomyosarcoma of the inferior vena cava. The surgery team discusses the case with the radiologist, and all agree that there are multiple challenges with obtaining a tissue diagnosis and determining resectability. Thus, it is decided that this patient should be discussed at a multidisciplinary case conference. In the present article, we feature a case-based scenario focusing on the role of the radiologist in this type of multidisciplinary team.

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)0.006
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0070.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.171
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Oncology→Same topicSarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→