MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Automatic functional analysis of left ventricle in cardiac cine MRI.

2013· article· en· W151677508 on OpenAlexafffund
Yingli Lu, Kim A. Connelly, Alexander Dick, Graham A. Wright, Perry Radau

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCircle Cardiovascular Imaging
KeywordsVentricleEndocardiumEjection fractionMedicineMagnetic resonance imagingHeart failureSegmentationMuscle hypertrophyCardiologyStroke volumeNuclear medicineInternal medicineComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: A fully automated left ventricle segmentation method for the functional analysis of cine short axis (SAX) magnetic resonance (MR) images was developed, and its performance evaluated with 133 studies of subjects with diverse pathology: ischemic heart failure (n=34), non-ischemic heart failure (n=30), hypertrophy (n=32), and healthy (n=37). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The proposed automatic method locates the left ventricle (LV), then for each image detects the contours of the endocardium, epicardium, papillary muscles and trabeculations. Manually and automatically determined contours and functional parameters were compared quantitatively. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between automatically and manually determined end systolic volume (ESV), end diastolic volume (EDV), ejection fraction (EF) and left ventricular mass (LVM) for each of the four groups (paired sample t-test, α=0.05). The automatically determined functional parameters showed high correlations with those derived from manual contours, and the Bland-Altman analysis biases were small (1.51 mL, 1.69 mL, -0.02%, -0.66 g for ESV, EDV, EF and LVM, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The proposed technique automatically and rapidly detects endocardial, epicardial, papillary muscles' and trabeculations' contours providing accurate and reproducible quantitative MRI parameters, including LV mass and EF.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.326

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations36
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207