MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285394562 · doi:10.1177/08465371221108057

The Ovarian/Adnexal Reporting and Data System for Ultrasound: From Standardized Terminology to Optimal Risk Assessment and Management

2022· article· en· W4285394562 on OpenAlexaff
Catherine H. Phillips, Yang Guo, Loretta M. Strachowski, Priyanka Jha, Caroline Reinhold, Rochelle F. Andreotti

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Association of Radiologists Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTerminologyLexiconRisk stratificationMalignancyRadiologyOvarian cancerOvarian tumorMedical physicsGynecologyArtificial intelligenceCancerComputer sciencePathologyInternal medicineLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The American College of Radiology (ACR) Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) lexicon and risk assessment tool for ultrasound (US) provides a framework for characterization of ovarian and adnexal pathology with the ultimate goal of harmonizing reporting and patient management strategies. Since the first O-RADS US publication in 2018, multiple validation studies have shown O-RADS US to have excellent diagnostic accuracy, with the majority of these studies using O-RADS 4 as the optimal cut-off for detecting ovarian cancer. Most of the existing validation studies include a dedicated training phase and confirm that ORADS US categories and lexicon descriptors are associated with high level inter-read agreement, regardless of radiologist training level or practice experience. O-RADS US has a similar inter-reader agreement when compared to Gynecologic Imaging Reporting and Data System (GIRADS), Assessment of Different Neoplasias in the adnexa (ADNEX), and International Tumor Analysis Group (IOTA) simple rules. System descriptors have been shown to correlate with expected malignancy rates and the O-RADS US risk stratification system has been shown to perform in the expected range of malignancy risk per category. Further directions will focus on clarifying governing concepts and lexicon terminology as well as further refining risk stratification categories based on data from published validation studies.

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)0.051
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.102
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Reporting · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.949
Threshold uncertainty score0.312

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0510.102
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0110.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.296 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
DomainReporting
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

Citations23
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Association of Radiologists JournalSame topicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207