Computed Tomography Evaluation of Coronary Atherosclerosis: The Road Travelled, and What Lies Ahead
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Coronary CT angiography (CCTA) is now endorsed by all major cardiology guidelines for the investigation of chest pain and assessment for coronary artery disease (CAD) in appropriately selected patients. CAD is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. There is extensive literature to support CCTA diagnostic and prognostic value both for stable and acute symptoms. It enables rapid and cost-effective rule-out of CAD, and permits quantification and characterization of coronary plaque and associated significance. In this comprehensive review, we detail the road traveled as CCTA evolved to include quantitative assessment of plaque stenosis and extent, characterization of plaque characteristics including high-risk features, functional assessment including fractional flow reserve-CT (FFR-CT), and CT perfusion techniques. The state of current guideline recommendations and clinical applications are reviewed, as well as future directions in the rapidly advancing field of CT technology, including photon counting and applications of artificial intelligence (AI).
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".