MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2742035694 · doi:10.1017/dmp.2017.52

Diagnostic Imaging in Disasters: A Bibliometric Analysis

2017· review· en· W2742035694 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDisaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDisaster Response and Management
Canadian institutionsVancouver General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreparednessMedicineEmergency managementDisaster medicineMEDLINEPublic healthTerrorismChinaOutbreakMedical emergencyPoison controlSuicide preventionPolitical sciencePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the role of diagnostic imaging in the clinical diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up management of patients in response to disasters. METHODS: A MEDLINE (OVID) search of original research articles identified 177 articles on this topic published since 2000. A bibliometric analysis was conducted on the top 100 articles ranked by average yearly citation. RESULTS: The most frequently studied disaster categories were disease outbreak (55 articles), armed conflict (23 articles), terrorist incident (10 articles), and earthquake (7 articles). The most studied disasters were the H1N1 influenza outbreak in 2009 (28 articles), Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome outbreak in 2003 (24 articles), War in Afghanistan, 2001-2014 (8 articles), Iraq War, 2003-2011 (6 articles), and the Sichuan earthquake (China) in 2008 (6 articles). Among the first authors, 59 were primarily affiliated with Radiology. The United States of America produced the most articles (25 articles), followed by the People's Republic of China (24 articles). Eighty-one studies were retrospective, with 19 studies being prospective. Computed tomography was the most investigated modality (52.8%), followed by conventional radiography (33.3%) and ultrasound (9.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Our study identifies intellectual milestones in the utility of diagnostic imaging in response to various disasters, and could help guide future research in developing disaster management plans. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2018;12:265-277).

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.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Bibliometrics
Consensus categoriesBibliometrics
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.891
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.000
Bibliometrics0.0860.050
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.410
GPT teacher head0.569
Teacher spread0.159 · 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