The left lateral projection is comparable to horizontal beam radiography for identifying experimental small volume pneumoperitoneum in the canine abdomen
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nontraumatic spontaneous pneumoperitoneum suggests the presence of gastrointestinal perforation; early detection can be lifesaving. Horizontal beam projections have been reported to be more sensitive than standard radiographic views for detecting small volumes of free peritoneal gas. This prospective, experimental, analytical study compared both left lateral (LL) and ventrodorsal (VD) standard views to horizontal beam projections for detecting small volumes of artificially induced pneumoperitoneum in live dogs. The effect of radiology training on accurate detection of small amounts of free peritoneal air was also assessed. Fourteen dogs had four radiographic projections taken after injection of 0, 2.5, 5, and 10 mL of cumulative air into their abdominal cavities. Radiographs were interpreted individually by three American College of Veterinary Radiology-certified radiologists and three small animal internship-trained veterinarians who were blinded to the air volume injected. At 2.5 and 10 mL of air injected, the LL projection had highest odds of an accurate response (odds ratio [OR] = 2.4 and 99.0 when compared to VD horizontal and VD projections, respectively). At 5 mL of air injected, the lateral horizontal (LH) projection had the highest odds of an accurate response (OR = 3.2 compared to VD horizontal). The LL projection was not significantly different from the LH projection at all volumes of air injected. Board certification led to higher odds of accurate responses at volumes of 5 (OR = 2.2) and 10 mL (OR = 3.6), as compared to nonspecialist veterinarians. Overall, LH and standard LL appeared to be the most useful radiographic projections for detection of small amounts of free peritoneal gas.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".