Meeting Abstracts from the British Society of Breast Radiology Annual Scientific Meeting 2022
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As a unit, we implemented wireless image transfer from our Screening Mobile van in 2016, which resulted in some reduction in paper usage (only printing Client forms for those attending). However, the suspension of Screening at the start of the pandemic enabled us to undertake a multidisciplinary (radiological, radiographic and especially administrative) in-depth assessment of the existing pathway and design an equivalent electronic pathway, entirely without paper from screen to result. Redundant/duplicated paper-based processes (generally historical) were identified and expunged. The key has been the utilisation of the NBSS whiteboard (SAWB) as a 'nerve centre' to allow tracking of clinics waiting to be closed, read, and reconciled, as well as those with outstanding results. Processes were designed to allow. (a) communication of clinical findings between mammographer and reader (using 'Clinical Alert' system on NBSS), (b) verification of image checking on PACS (via a standalone database), (c) recording of abnormalities on PACS images (d) communication of assessment imaging requirements to the admin team.
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 | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".