MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3052072725 · doi:10.1177/0846537120947148

Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Musculoskeletal Imaging: From the Request to the Report

2020· review· en· W3052072725 on OpenAlex

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Association of Radiologists Journal · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMedical Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRadiologyMagnetic resonance imagingMedical physicsGrading (engineering)Medical imaging

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Artificial intelligence (AI) will transform every step in the imaging value chain, including interpretive and noninterpretive components. Radiologists should familiarize themselves with AI developments to become leaders in their clinical implementation. This article explores the impact of AI through the entire imaging cycle of musculoskeletal radiology, from the placement of the requisition to the generation of the report, with an added Canadian perspective. Noninterpretive tasks which may be assisted by AI include the ordering of appropriate imaging tests, automatic exam protocoling, optimized scheduling, shorter magnetic resonance imaging acquisition time, computed tomography imaging with reduced artifact and radiation dose, and new methods of generation and utilization of radiology reports. Applications of AI for image interpretation consist of the determination of bone age, body composition measurements, screening for osteoporosis, identification of fractures, evaluation of segmental spine pathology, detection and temporal monitoring of osseous metastases, diagnosis of primary bone and soft tissue tumors, and grading of osteoarthritis.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.741

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.282 · 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