Abdominal and pelvic radiographs of medical devices and materials- part 2: neurologic and genitourinary devices and materials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Radiographs of the abdomen and pelvis are routinely obtained as a standard part of clinical care for the abdomen and pelvis. Brisk advances in technology over the last few decades have resulted in a multitude of medical devices and materials. Recognizing and evaluating these devices on abdominal and pelvic radiographs are critical, yet increasingly a difficult endeavor. In addition, multiple devices serving different purposes may have a similar radiographic appearance and position causing confusion for the interpreting radiologist. The role of the radiologist is to not only identify accurately these medical objects, but also to confirm for their accurate placement and to recognize any complications that could affect patient care, management or even be potentially life threatening. An extensive online search of literature showed our review article to be the most comprehensive work on medical devices and materials of the abdomen and pelvis, and in this second part of our two-part series, we discuss in depth about the neurologic and genitourinary devices seen on abdominal and pelvic radiographs.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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".