MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1524709649 · doi:10.1002/mrm.25009

Impact of frequency drift on gamma-aminobutyric acid-edited MR spectroscopy

2013· article· en· W1524709649 on OpenAlexaff
Ashley D. Harris, Benjamin Glaubitz, Jamie Near, John Evans, Nicolaas A.J. Puts, Tobias Schmidt‐Wilcke, Martin Tegenthoff, Peter B. Barker, Richard A.E. Edden

Bibliographic record

VenueMagnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsDouglas Mental Health University InstituteMcGill University
FundersNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNational Institute of Mental Health
KeywordsSubtractionNuclear magnetic resonancegamma-Aminobutyric acidPhysicsComputer scienceChemistryMathematicsBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To investigate the quantitative impact of frequency drift on Gamma-Aminobutyric acid (GABA+)-edited MRS of the human brain at 3 Tesla (T). METHODS: Three sequential GABA+-edited MEGA-PRESS acquisitions were acquired in fifteen sessions; in ten of these, MRS was preceded by functional MRI (fMRI) to induce frequency drift, which was estimated from the creatine resonance at 3.0 ppm. Simulations were performed to examine the effects of frequency drift on the editing efficiency of GABA and co-edited macromolecules (MM) and of subtraction artifacts on GABA+ quantification. The efficacy of postprocessing frequency correction was also investigated. RESULTS: Gradient-induced frequency drifts affect GABA+ quantification for at least 30 min after imaging. Average frequency drift was low in control sessions and as high as -2 Hz/min after fMRI. Uncorrected frequency drift has an approximately linear effect on GABA+ measurements with a -10 Hz drift resulting in a 16% decrease in GABA+, primarily due to subtraction artifacts. CONCLUSION: Imaging acquisitions with high gradient duty cycles can impact subsequent GABA+ measurements. Postprocessing can address subtraction artifacts, but not changes in editing efficiency or GABA:MM signal ratios; therefore, protocol design should avoid intensive gradient sequences before edited MRS Magn Reson Med 72:941-948, 2014. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations115
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMagnetic Resonance in MedicineSame topicAdvanced MRI Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207