Who Should Be Performing Endovascular Interventions?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
-There has been a dramatic increase in the interest and profile of endovascular aneurysm repair over the past 10 years. The early results following endovascular repair are promising, however, the durability of this technique is not yet known. Leaving that issue aside for the time being, there is increasing controversy with regard to who is best qualified to perform the intervention-vascular surgeons, interventional radiologists, or cardiologists. Dr. Kim Hodgson, a vascular surgeon, and Dr. Stuart Geller, an interventional radiologist, will be debating the question, "Who should be performing endovascular interventions?" Each will have 10 minutes to make an argument on behalf of their respective specialty, followed by three to four minutes of rebuttal. The debate will then be open to the floor for general discussion. KEYWORD Endovascular - aneurysm - stent
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 | 0.015 | 0.047 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.021 | 0.022 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.007 |
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".