MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Liver Ultrasound Elastography: An Update to the World Federation for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology Guidelines and Recommendations

2018· review· en· W2891589032 on OpenAlexaff
Giovanna Ferraioli, Vincent Wai‐Sun Wong, Laurent Castéra, Annalisa Berzigotti, Ioan Sporea, Christoph F. Dietrich, Byung Ihn Choi, Stephanie R. Wilson, Masatoshi Kudo, R. Graham Barr

Bibliographic record

VenueUltrasound in Medicine & Biology · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsFoothills Medical CentreUniversity of Calgary
FundersChugai PharmaceuticalAllerganSamsungAstellas PharmaBracco DiagnosticsOno PharmaceuticalEisaiGilead SciencesSirtex MedicalPfizerDaiichi Sankyo EuropeKowa CompanySiemens HealthineersBristol-Myers Squibb
KeywordsMedical physicsElastographyTransient elastographyMedicineUltrasoundMEDLINERadiologyPathologyLiver fibrosisBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The World Federation for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology has produced these guidelines for the use of elastography techniques in liver diseases. For each available technique, the reproducibility, results and limitations are analyzed, and recommendations are given. This set of guidelines updates the first version, published in 2015. Since the prior guidelines, there have been several advances in technology. The recommendations are based on the international published literature, and the strength of each recommendation is judged according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. The document has a clinical perspective and is aimed at assessing the usefulness of elastography in the management of liver 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0070.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.150
GPT teacher head0.447
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations561
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueUltrasound in Medicine & Biology→Same topicLiver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→