MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323531922 · doi:10.1371/journal.pdig.0000215

Benefit of stereoscopic volume rendering for the identification of pediatric pulmonary vein stenosis from CT angiography

2023· article· en· W4323531922 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenuePLOS Digital Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAnatomy and Medical Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaDalhousie UniversityCanadian VIGOUR CentreUniversity of Alberta
FundersServierUniversity of AlbertaAlberta InnovatesAlberta Innovates - Health SolutionsWomen and Children's Health Research InstituteChildren's Health Research Institute
KeywordsMedicineStereoscopyVolume renderingRadiologyComputed tomography angiographyAngiographyStenosisRendering (computer graphics)Computer visionComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of three-dimensional (3D) technologies in medical practice is increasing; however, its use is largely untested. One 3D technology, stereoscopic volume-rendered 3D display, can improve depth perception. Pulmonary vein stenosis (PVS) is a rare cardiovascular pathology, often diagnosed by computed tomography (CT), where volume rendering may be useful. Depth cues may be lost when volume rendered CT is displayed on regular screens instead of 3D displays. The objective of this study was to determine whether the 3D stereoscopic display of volume-rendered CT improved perception compared to standard monoscopic display, as measured by PVS diagnosis. CT angiograms (CTAs) from 18 pediatric patients aged 3 weeks to 2 years were volume rendered and displayed with and without stereoscopic display. Patients had 0 to 4 pulmonary vein stenoses. Participants viewed the CTAs in 2 groups with half on monoscopic and half on stereoscopic display and the converse a minimum of 2 weeks later, and their diagnoses were recorded. A total of 24 study participants, comprised of experienced staff cardiologists, cardiovascular surgeons and radiologists, and their trainees viewed the CTAs and assessed the presence and location of PVS. Cases were classified as simple (2 or fewer lesions) or complex (3 or more lesions). Overall, there were fewer type 2 errors in diagnosis for stereoscopic display than standard display, an insignificant difference (p = 0.095). There was a significant decrease in type 2 errors for complex multiple lesion cases (≥3) vs simpler cases (p = 0.027) and improvement in localization of pulmonary veins (p = 0.011). Subjectively, 70% of participants stated that stereoscopy was helpful in the identification of PVS. The stereoscopic display did not result in significantly decreased errors in PVS diagnosis but was helpful for more complex cases.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.812
Threshold uncertainty score0.258

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.222 · 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