MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323035284 · doi:10.1002/9781119790686.ch33

AI for Workflow Enhancement in Radiology

2023· other· en· W4323035284 on OpenAlexaff
Sabeena Jalal, Jason Yao, Savvas Nicolaou, Adnan Sheikh

Bibliographic record

VenueAI in Clinical Medicine · 2023
Typeother
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiology practices and education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaMcMaster UniversityVancouver General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkflowRadiologyComputer scienceWorkflow technologyScheduling (production processes)Medical physicsMedicineEngineeringDatabaseOperations management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AI has the ability to support the radiologist far beyond the process of image analysis. AI can be utilized to enhance efficiency at all stages of radiology workflow by assisting in an array of non-diagnostic and repetitive tasks – for example, resource allocation, support for imaging order entry, patient scheduling, and improving the radiology workflow. This chapter will provide a basic overview of how AI technology improves radiology workflow management. In addition, we have outlined an illustrative case study of AI support in radiology workflow. We aim to offer a broader understanding of the value of using AI technology in a radiology department.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.613
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.519
Teacher spread0.393 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAI in Clinical MedicineSame topicRadiology practices and educationFrench-language works237,207