Pictorial Essay of Cervical Duplex Ultrasonography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Cervical duplex ultrasonography (CDU) is a simple, non-invasive, portable technique, that provides valuable high-quality visual information about the integrity of the carotid and vertebral vessels, plaque morphology and flow hemodynamics. CDU is useful in the assessment and follow up of patients with cerebrovascular disease as well as other conditions like inflammatory vasculitis, carotid artery dissection and carotid body tumours. CDU is inexpensive and invaluable in smaller centres. Methods: CDU was performed in all patients in both longitudinal and transverse planes in the out-patient clinic. Brightness mode (B-mode) and Doppler waveforms were obtained. Relevant findings were presented. Results: CDU provides real time visualisation of plaque characteristics and follow up, hemodynamic characteristics in Takayasu arteritis, visualisation of dissection. Conclusion: With availability of MR/CT angiography, CDU can be an adjuvant in follow up, triage and early bed-side diagnosis of the vascular diseases. We present our experience with CDU in the out-patient clinics in this pictorial essay.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.013 |
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".