MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3096515872 · doi:10.1002/ajum.12228

Point‐of‐care lung ultrasound in the assessment of patients with COVID‐19: A tutorial

2020· article· en· W3096515872 on OpenAlexaff
Ximena Cid‐Serra, Andrew Wang, Johan Heiberg, David Canty, Colin Royse, Xiaoqiang Li, Doa El‐Ansary, Yang Yang, Kavi Haji, Darsim Haji, André Denault, Lynda Tivendale, Kyle S. Brooks, Xiaobo Hu, Alistair Royse

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralasian Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound in Clinical Applications
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalMontreal Heart Institute
FundersWest China Hospital, Sichuan UniversitySichuan UniversityUniversity of Melbourne
KeywordsMedicineUltrasoundPneumothoraxLungRadiologyPleural effusionCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)TriagePneumonitisLung ultrasoundPathologyEmergency medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The adoption of point-of-care lung ultrasound for both suspected and confirmed COVID-19 patients highlights the issues of accessibility to ultrasound training and equipment. Lung ultrasound is more sensitive than chest radiography in detecting viral pneumonitis and preferred over computed tomography for reasons including its portability, reduced healthcare worker exposure and repeatability. The main lung ultrasound findings in COVID-19 patients are interstitial syndrome, irregular pleural line and subpleural consolidations. Consolidations are most likely found in critical patients in need of ventilatory support. Hence, lung ultrasound may be used to timely triage patients who may have evolving pneumonitis. Other respiratory pathology that may be detected by lung ultrasound includes pulmonary oedema, pneumothorax, consolidation and large effusion. A key barrier to incorporate lung ultrasound in the assessment of COVID-19 patients is adequate decontamination of ultrasound equipment to avoid viral spread. This tutorial provides a practical method to learn lung ultrasound and a cost-effective method of preventing contamination of ultrasound equipment and a practical method for performing and interpreting lung ultrasound.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.019

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations15
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralasian Journal of Ultrasound in MedicineSame topicUltrasound in Clinical ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207