3 ms·
I haven't read the research article yet, but since the jhu.edu article doesn't link to it, here it is: https://www.nature.com/articles/s44161-022-00041-9 https:
by carbocation 5y ago
I haven't read the research article yet, but since the jhu.edu article doesn't link to it, here it is: https://www.nature.com/articles/s44161-022-00041-9 https://www.nature.com/articles/s44161-022-00041-9
- donttellitsme 5y agoThanks for the link. Unfortunately it does not seem to be on sci-hub (yet?) and apparently my institution doesn't want to pay for nature anymore. While I have no doubt that imaging-based neural nets can outperform a lot of the cardiac risk scores in clinical use today (they are usually pretty rudimentary), I would be fairly cautious about this article. Let's say one of the authors has a pretty long record of making extraordinary claims backed by very little evidence; managing to impress the medical community while at the same time being regarded as an impostor in the computer science community. Of course I'm just a random stranger on the internet, so I might just be a jealous competitor ;)
- carbocation 5y agoI have a Harvard library login and ran into the same issue (tried sci-hub as well, no luck).