MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970160652 · doi:10.1039/c1ra00627d

Fluorinated contrast agents for magnetic resonance imaging; a review of recent developments

2011· review· en· W1970160652 on OpenAlexaff
James C. Knight, Peter G. Edwards, Stephen J. Paisey

Bibliographic record

VenueRSC Advances · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicLanthanide and Transition Metal Complexes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersLlywodraeth Cymru
KeywordsDendrimerMagnetic resonance imagingNanotechnologyFluorine-19 NMRMicelleChemistryContrast (vision)Nuclear magnetic resonanceMaterials scienceComputer scienceNuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopyOrganic chemistryMedicinePhysicsArtificial intelligenceRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The development of medical imaging probes for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a particularly dynamic area of research. At present, many prominent groups are dedicating significant resources to tailoring and optimising the performance of potential contrast agents. Whilst 1H MRI has become an indispensable tool for the imaging of disease states, it frequently suffers from low contrast owing to background signal from intrinsic 1H. As a result, increasing attention is being directed at compounds containing 19F as this nucleus has a similar NMR sensitivity to 1H and, importantly, intrinsic 19F signals are virtually undetectable in vivo. For several decades, perfluorinated molecules (in which all of the C–H bonds in the parent molecule have been replaced with C–F bonds) and highly fluorous gases such as SF6 have traditionally been used for these kinds of investigations and there have been some excellent reviews of these compounds and their applications. However, recently 19F imaging is showing signs of evolution, particularly as there have been several reports of fluorinated responsive (smart) agents, micelles, dendrimers and hyperbranched polymers being investigated as targets for 19F-MRI. Furthermore, examples of multimodal contrast agents containing 19F nuclei are also starting to emerge. In this review we aim to summarise these exciting recent chemical developments.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.005

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations108
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRSC AdvancesSame topicLanthanide and Transition Metal ComplexesFrench-language works237,207