MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396957845 · doi:10.1016/j.acra.2024.04.047

Optimizing Patient-Centered Care in Breast Imaging: Strategies for Improving Patient Experience

2024· review· en· W4396957845 on OpenAlexaff
Sonali Sharma, Cheryl White, Shushiela Appavoo, Charlotte J. Yong‐Hing

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademic Radiology · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPatient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer AgencyUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of British Columbia Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBreast imagingPatient-centered carePatient careMedical physicsMammographyMEDLINERadiologyBreast cancerNursingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Breast cancer impacts countless individuals every year, bringing with it a substantial health burden (1). Central to breast cancer management, is early detection and diagnosis, which significantly improves survival rates and patient outcomes. Breast cancer screening with imaging modalities such as mammography, ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and biopsy, serve as the crucial diagnostic tool in this process (2,3). The American College of Radiology recommends regular screenings, especially for high-risk individuals, as a strategy to ensure timely intervention and treatment (4).

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.855
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.006
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 head0.201
GPT teacher head0.470
Teacher spread0.269 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademic RadiologySame topicPatient-Provider Communication in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207