MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2762275873 · doi:10.1093/ehjci/jex146

A joint procedural position statement on imaging in cardiac sarcoidosis: from the Cardiovascular and Inflammation & Infection Committees of the European Association of Nuclear Medicine, the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging, and the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology

2017· review· en· W2762275873 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

VenueEuropean Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSarcoidosis and Beryllium Toxicity Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSarcoidosisPositron emission tomographyCardiac sarcoidosisMagnetic resonance imagingMyocardial perfusion imagingRadiologyPosition paperCardiologyInternal medicineCardiac magnetic resonancePerfusionNuclear medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This joint position paper illustrates the role and the correct use of echocardiography, radionuclide imaging with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography, radionuclide myocardial perfusion imaging and cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging for the evaluation and management of patients with known or suspected cardiac sarcoidosis. This position paper will aid in standardizing imaging for cardiac sarcoidosis and may facilitate clinical trials and pooling of multi-centre data on cardiac sarcoidosis. Proposed flow charts for the work up and management of cardiac sarcoidosis are included.

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)0.046
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.837
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0460.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.008
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.265 · 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