MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4296664047 · doi:10.1148/ryct.220183

CAD-RADS™ 2.0 – 2022 Coronary Artery Disease – Reporting and Data System An Expert Consensus Document of the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography (SCCT), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), the American College of Radiology (ACR) and the North America Society of Cardiovascular Imaging (NASCI)

2022· article· en· W4296664047 on OpenAlexaff
Ricardo C. Cury, Jonathon Leipsic, Suhny Abbara, Stephan Achenbach, Daniel S. Berman, Márcio Sommer Bittencourt, Matthew J. Budoff, Kavitha M. Chinnaiyan, Andrew Choi, Brian Ghoshhajra, Jill Jacobs, Lynne Koweek, John R. Lesser, Christopher D. Maroules, Geoffrey D. Rubin, Frank J. Rybicki, Leslee J. Shaw, Michelle C. Williams, Eric E. Williamson, Charles S. White, Todd C. Villines, Ron Blankstein

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiology Cardiothoracic Imaging · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersBritish Heart Foundation
KeywordsMedicineCoronary artery diseaseStenosisFractional flow reserveCADRadiologyCardiologyInternal medicineComputed tomography angiographyAngiographyCoronary angiographyMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Coronary Artery Disease Reporting and Data System (CAD-RADS) was created to standardize reporting system for patients undergoing coronary CT angiography (CCTA) and to guide possible next steps in patient management. The goal of this updated 2022 CAD-RADS 2.0 is to improve the initial reporting system for CCTA by considering new technical developments in Cardiac CT, including data from recent clinical trials and new clinical guidelines. The updated CAD-RADS classification will follow an established framework of stenosis, plaque burden, and modifiers, which will include assessment of lesion-specific ischemia using CT fractional-flow-reserve (CT-FFR) or myocardial CT perfusion (CTP), when performed. Similar to the method used in the original CAD-RADS version, the determinant for stenosis severity classification will be the most severe coronary artery luminal stenosis on a per-patient basis, ranging from CAD-RADS 0 (zero) for absence of any plaque or stenosis to CAD-RADS 5 indicating the presence of at least one totally occluded coronary artery. Given the increasing data supporting the prognostic relevance of coronary plaque burden, this document will provide various methods to estimate and report total plaque burden. The addition of P1 to P4 descriptors are used to denote increasing categories of plaque burden. The main goal of CAD-RADS, which should always be interpreted together with the impression found in the report, remains to facilitate communication of test results with referring physicians along with suggestions for subsequent patient management. In addition, CAD-RADS will continue to provide a framework of standardization that may benefit education, research, peer-review, artificial intelligence development, clinical trial design, population health and quality assurance with the ultimate goal of improving patient care. Keywords: Coronary Artery Disease, Coronary CTA, CAD-RADS, Reporting and Data System, Stenosis Severity, Report Standardization Terminology, Plaque Burden, Ischemia Supplemental material is available for this article. This article is published synchronously in Radiology: Cardiothoracic Imaging, Journal of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging, Journal of the American College of Radiology, and International Journal for Cardiovascular Imaging. © 2022 Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography. Published by RSNA with permission.

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)0.047
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.077
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score0.250

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0470.077
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0070.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.053

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations126
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiology Cardiothoracic ImagingSame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207