Comparison Between Manual and Semiautomated Volumetric Measurements of Pituitary Adenomas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Linear measurements have many limitations. The aim of this study is to compare manual and semiautomated volumetric measurements of pituitary adenomas. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans of 38 patients with pituitary adenomas were analyzed. Preoperative MRI was acquired on a 1.5 T. MRI volumes of the pituitary adenomas were obtained by two methods: manual (MA) and semiautomated (SA). The concurrent validity for SA and MA methods on 38 patients in the form of correlation coefficient was 0.97 (p < 0.0001). The intraobserver and the interobserver correlation coefficients for SA volumes were both 0.98, as for the intraobserver MA volumes were 0.98. Although the results of both methods are comparable, analysis of volumetric measurements by SA method is more time-efficient than MA segmentation. Precision in volumetric measurement techniques is likely to increase reliability of posttherapeutic monitoring of pituitary adenomas.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".