Pediatric Hepatoblastoma, Hepatocellular Carcinoma, and Other Hepatic Neoplasms: Consensus Imaging Recommendations from American College of Radiology Pediatric Liver Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) Working Group
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Appropriate imaging is imperative in evaluating children with a primary hepatic malignancy such as hepatoblastoma or hepatocellular carcinoma. For use in the adult patient population, the American College of Radiology created the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) to provide consistent terminology and to improve imaging interpretation. At present, no similar consensus exists to guide imaging and interpretation of pediatric patients at risk for developing a liver neoplasm or how best to evaluate a pediatric patient with a known liver neoplasm. Therefore, a new Pediatric Working Group within American College of Radiology LI-RADS was created to provide consensus for imaging recommendations and interpretation of pediatric liver neoplasms. The article was drafted based on the most up-to-date existing information as interpreted by imaging experts comprising the Pediatric LI-RADS Working Group. Guidance is provided regarding appropriate imaging modalities and protocols, as well as imaging interpretation and reporting, with the goals to improve imaging quality, to decrease image interpretation errors, to enhance communication with referrers, and to advance patient care. An expanded version of this document that includes broader background information on pediatric hepatocellular carcinoma and rationale for recommendations can be found in Appendix E1 (online).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".