Editorial: Novel methods to advance diagnostic and treatment value of medical imaging for cardiovascular disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of medical imaging has substantially increased over the past decade, thanks to the technological advancements evident from the dramatic improvement in the sensitivity and spatial resolution of imaging modalities. Cardiovascular imaging has been at a crossroads regarding technological advances, with a shift in focus from single-modality diagnosis to an integrated multimodality approach that can provide comprehensive assessments of morphology, pathophysiology, and disease biology to stratify the patient risk and guide therapies. The wide inter-subject variability in cardiovascular anatomy and pathophysiology urges the design of personalized patient management, which can highly benefit from clinical imaging technologies. The remarkable advances in medical imaging have sparked the development of new image processing algorithms and image-based simulation tools. In addition to providing comprehensive diagnostic information, some tools can even predict intervention outcomes, thereby enabling personalized intervention planning. This Research Topic, Novel Methods to Advance Diagnostic and Treatment Value of Medical Imaging for Cardiovascular Disease, focuses on tools that augment the power of medical imaging to provide detailed quantification of cardiovascular disease. Here, we present a Research Topic of 21 research articles that provide the
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".