MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396741994 · doi:10.1177/08465371241250197

Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Acute Abdominal Imaging

2024· review· en· W4396741994 on OpenAlexaff
Jason Yao, Linda C. Chu, Michael N. Patlas

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Association of Radiologists Journal · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAppendicitis Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRadiologyAbdominal painPresentation (obstetrics)Acute abdominal painModalitiesModality (human–computer interaction)Bowel obstructionIntensive care medicineArtificial intelligenceSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Artificial intelligence (AI) is a rapidly growing field with significant implications for radiology. Acute abdominal pain is a common clinical presentation that can range from benign conditions to life-threatening emergencies. The critical nature of these situations renders emergent abdominal imaging an ideal candidate for AI applications. CT, radiographs, and ultrasound are the most common modalities for imaging evaluation of these patients. For each modality, numerous studies have assessed the performance of AI models for detecting common pathologies, such as appendicitis, bowel obstruction, and cholecystitis. The capabilities of these models range from simple classification to detailed severity assessment. This narrative review explores the evolution, trends, and challenges in AI applications for evaluating acute abdominal pathologies. We review implementations of AI for non-traumatic and traumatic abdominal pathologies, with discussion of potential clinical impact, challenges, and future directions for the technology.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.325 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations21
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Association of Radiologists JournalSame topicAppendicitis Diagnosis and ManagementFrench-language works237,207