MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229036199 · doi:10.1259/bjr.20211333

The forgotten lacrimal gland and lacrimal drainage apparatus: pictorial review of CT and MRI findings and differential diagnosis

2022· review· en· W4229036199 on OpenAlexaff
Jaykumar Raghavan Nair, Raza Syed, Ian Chan, Natalia Gorelik, Jeffrey Chankowsky, Raquel del Carpio-O’Donovan

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Radiology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNasolacrimal Duct Obstruction Treatments
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreHospital for Sick ChildrenToronto Western HospitalMcGill University Health CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLacrimal glandMedicineLacrimal apparatusOrbit (dynamics)Lacrimal sacAnatomySoft tissueRadiologyNasolacrimal ductPathologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The lacrimal gland is a bilobed serous gland located in the superolateral aspect of the orbit. Lacrimal system pathologies can be broadly divided into pathologies of the lacrimal gland and those of the nasolacrimal drainage apparatus. These include distinct congenital, infectious, inflammatory, and benign, indeterminate, and malignant neoplastic lesions. Trauma and resultant fractures affecting lacrimal drainage apparatus is not part of this review; only non-traumatic diseases will be discussed. CT is the initial modality of choice because of its ability to delineate lacrimal system anatomy and demonstrate most lacrimal drainage system abnormalities and their extent. It also assesses bony architecture and characterizes any osseous changes. MRI is helpful in further characterizing these lesions and better assessing involvement of the surrounding soft tissue structures. In this pictorial review, we will review the anatomy of the lacrimal system, describe CT/MRI findings of the common and uncommon lacrimal system abnormalities and discuss relevance of imaging with regards to patient management.

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 score0.940
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.305
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of RadiologySame topicNasolacrimal Duct Obstruction TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207