MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976028037 · doi:10.3791/3555

MRI-guided Disruption of the Blood-brain Barrier using Transcranial Focused Ultrasound in a Rat Model

2012· article· en· W1976028037 on OpenAlexaff
Meaghan A. O’Reilly, Adam C. Waspe, Rajiv Chopra, Kullervo Hynynen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Visualized Experiments · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUltrasound and Hyperthermia Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Hospital
FundersNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering
KeywordsFocused ultrasoundBlood–brain barrierBrain tissueAnimal modelUltrasoundBiomedical engineeringNeuroscienceMedicinePathologyCentral nervous systemBiologyRadiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Focused ultrasound (FUS) disruption of the blood-brain barrier (BBB) is an increasingly investigated technique for circumventing the BBB(1-5). The BBB is a significant obstacle to pharmaceutical treatments of brain disorders as it limits the passage of molecules from the vasculature into the brain tissue to molecules less than approximately 500 Da in size(6). FUS induced BBB disruption (BBBD) is temporary and reversible(4) and has an advantage over chemical means of inducing BBBD by being highly localized. FUS induced BBBD provides a means for investigating the effects of a wide range of therapeutic agents on the brain, which would not otherwise be deliverable to the tissue in sufficient concentration. While a wide range of ultrasound parameters have proven successful at disrupting the BBB(2,5,7), there are several critical steps in the experimental procedure to ensure successful disruption with accurate targeting. This protocol outlines how to achieve MRI-guided FUS induced BBBD in a rat model, with a focus on the critical animal preparation and microbubble handling steps of the experiment.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.458

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.329 · 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 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

Citations18
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Visualized ExperimentsSame topicUltrasound and Hyperthermia ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207