MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3001556978 · doi:10.1177/0846537119885693

Fat-Containing Lesions of the Liver: A Review of Differential Diagnoses

2020· review· en· W3001556978 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew D. Chung

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Association of Radiologists Journal · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Anomalies and Fetal Surgery
Canadian institutionsKingston Health Sciences CentreQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDifferential diagnosisPelvisRadiologyMagnetic resonance imagingAbdomenMedical diagnosisSubcutaneous fatPathologyAdipose tissueInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The presence of intralesional fat provides an invaluable tool for narrowing the differential diagnosis for both benign and malignant neoplasms of the abdomen and pelvis. The ability to characterize intralesional fat is further expanded by the ability of magnetic resonance imaging to detect small quantities (intravoxel) of fat. The differential diagnosis of fat-containing lesions arising in the liver is broader than that of many other solid organs. However, this differential can be further refined depending on the type of fat (macroscopic vs intravoxel) and with the use of ancillary imaging findings. Radiologists must be aware of benign and malignant mimickers of common lesions.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score0.540

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Association of Radiologists JournalSame topicCongenital Anomalies and Fetal SurgeryFrench-language works237,207