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 OpenAlex
Christopher S. G. Murray, Tamanna Nahar, Hayrapet Kalashyan, Harald Becher, Navin C. Nanda

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

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.957
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.064
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