MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389833965 · doi:10.1002/9781119525127.ch1

Welcome to Endoscopy

2023· other· en· W4389833965 on OpenAlexaff
Catharine M. Walsh MD MEd PhD FRCPC, Ahmir Ahmad MBBS BSc MRCP, Brian P. Saunders MD FRCP FRCS, Jonathan Cohen MD FASGE FACG, Peter B. Cotton MD FRCP FRCS, Christopher B. Williams BM FRCP FRCS, Stephen Preston

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersEuropean Association for Endoscopic Surgery and other Interventional TechniquesAmerican College of GastroenterologyNorth American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and NutritionAmerican Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
KeywordsEndoscopeMistakeScope (computer science)EndoscopyInterpretation (philosophy)Computer sciencePsychologyMedicineRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter provides some reassuring thoughts to accompany the introduction to endoscopy. A common mistake of teachers is to overload clinical training with lessons about visual image interpretation while a novice is focusing on mastering the basic manipulative physical aspects of performing endoscopy. Key to success in this effort is the attitude and understanding that progress is incremental, and one can always improve. The next major novel frontier for the student of endoscopy is re-learning how to look at images. By the time a prospective endoscopist passes an endoscope for the first time, the mechanics of assessing visual inputs has long since become automatic and immediate. When students are observing a case in which the instructor is handling the endoscope, the tendency is to stare intently at the video monitor to see what the scope is imaging.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.342
Threshold uncertainty score0.939

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3420.164

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.281 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicColorectal Cancer Screening and DetectionFrench-language works237,207