Predicting mortality from AI cardiac volumes mass and coronary calcium on chest computed tomography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chest computed tomography is one of the most common diagnostic tests, with 15 million scans performed annually in the United States. Coronary calcium can be visualized on these scans, but other measures of cardiac risk such as atrial and ventricular volumes have classically required administration of contrast. Here we show that a fully automated pipeline, incorporating two artificial intelligence models, automatically quantifies coronary calcium, left atrial volume, left ventricular mass, and other cardiac chamber volumes in 29,687 patients from three cohorts. The model processes chamber volumes and coronary artery calcium with an end-to-end time of ~18 s, while failing to segment only 0.1% of cases. Coronary calcium, left atrial volume, and left ventricular mass index are independently associated with all-cause and cardiovascular mortality and significantly improve risk classification compared to identification of abnormalities by a radiologist. This automated approach can be integrated into clinical workflows to improve identification of abnormalities and risk stratification, allowing physicians to improve clinical decision-making.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".