MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3204921442 · doi:10.1111/imj.15562

Artificial intelligence in cardiology: fundamentals and applications

2021· review· en· W3204921442 on OpenAlexaff
Xavier Watson, Joshua D'Souza, Daniel J Cooper, R. Markham

Bibliographic record

VenueInternal Medicine Journal · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkflowMedicineArtificial intelligenceModalitiesArtificial neural networkField (mathematics)Set (abstract data type)Machine learningHealth carePatient careComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Artificial intelligence (AI) is an overarching term that encompasses a set of computational approaches that are trained through generalised learning to autonomously execute specific tasks. AI is a rapidly expanding field in medicine. In particular cardiology, with its high reliance on numerical patient data in decision making, has great potential to benefit from AI. Types of AI, including neural networks and computer vision, can dramatically change the day-to-day workflow of cardiologists, primarily through integration in diagnostic imaging modalities, periprocedural planning, electronic health record analysis and patient monitoring. Healthcare systems will undoubtedly become more automated and shift to more AI-driven methods to improve efficiency and reduce cost. Patients in the end will benefit from these changes with improved diagnostic accuracy, better tailored treatments resulting in a greater quality and quantity of life. In this article, we will describe some of the fundamental principles underlying AI that physicians should have an understanding of, along with current clinical applications.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.355
GPT teacher head0.540
Teacher spread0.186 · 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.

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

Citations20
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternal Medicine JournalSame topicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationFrench-language works237,207