MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2903234692 · doi:10.1111/echo.14197

Ultrasound assessment of carotid arteries: Current concepts, methodologies, diagnostic criteria, and technological advancements

2018· review· en· W2903234692 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher S. G. Murray, Tamanna Nahar, Hayrapet Kalashyan, Harald Becher, Navin C. Nanda

Bibliographic record

VenueEchocardiography · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineStroke (engine)StenosisCarotid arteriesCoronary artery diseaseDiseaseRadiologyCarotid artery diseaseCardiologyModalitiesUltrasoundCause of deathIntensive care medicineInternal medicineCarotid endarterectomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Following cardiac disease and cancer, stroke continues to be the third leading cause of death and disability due to chronic disease in the developed world. Appropriate screening tools are integral to early detection and prevention of major cardiovascular events. In a carotid artery, the presence of increased intima-media thickness, plaque, or stenosis is associated with increased risk of a transient ischemic attack or a stroke. Carotid artery ultrasound remains a long-standing and reliable tool in the current armamentarium of diagnostic modalities used to assess vascular morbidity at an early stage. The procedure has, over the last two decades, undergone considerable upgrades in technology, approach, and utility. This review examines in detail the current state and usage of this integrally important means of extracranial cerebrovascular assessment.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.360 · 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

Citations96
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEchocardiographySame topicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery DiseasesFrench-language works237,207