MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1983665642 · doi:10.1118/1.3134243

Prospective cardiac gating of carotid three‐dimensional ultrasound

2009· article· en· W1983665642 on OpenAlexaff
Christiane L. Mallett, Lori Gardi, Aaron Fenster, Grace Párraga

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases
Canadian institutionsRobarts Clinical TrialsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGatingMedicineProspective cohort studyUltrasoundCardiologyCardiac cycleInternal medicineCommon carotid arteryConfidence intervalElectrocardiographyRadiologyNuclear medicineCarotid arteries

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quantitative measurements of carotid atherosclerosis can be determined using three-dimensional ultrasound (3DUS). This pilot study involved the development of prospective cardiac gating of 3DUS carotid images to reduce cardiac cycle-derived arterial pulsatility. The method developed uses electrocardiograph signal detection of the cardiac cycle R wave with imaging acquisition delayed in time (deltat) after the R wave is detected. Pulsatility of the common carotid artery was measured by calculating the mean percentage change in arterial cross-sectional area (%deltaA) in moderate atherosclerosis (MA) patients (12% +/- 1%) and healthy volunteers (HVs) (16% +/- 3%) and found that %deltaA was significantly higher for HV than for MA (p = 0.016) when no cardiac gating was used. The cardiac gating method was tested with deltat = 250 ms and deltat = 400 ms in young healthy volunteers and rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients. For all 3DUS measurements acquired without gating, there was a significant association between %deltaA and age (r2 = 0.20, p = 0.035), and mean %deltaA (in HV and RA) was 13% +/- 5% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 10%-17%]. For deltat = 250 ms mean %deltaA was significantly different and decreased to 7% +/- 3% (95% CI = 5%-10%) and for deltat = 400 ms it was significantly different and decreased to 6% +/- 1% (95% CI = 6%-7%) (p = 0.001 for both comparisons). There was no significant difference in mean %deltaA between gating conditions (p = 0.8); however, the 95% CI for %deltaA was decreased for deltat = 400 ms as compared to deltat = 250 ms. Both gating methods also significantly decreased %deltaA to below the reference standard of 12% +/- 1% for MA (p < 0.01 for both comparisons), suggesting that prospective cardiac gating of carotid 3DUS reduces pulsatility effects in HV and RA to levels lower than observed for much older MA patients.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery DiseasesFrench-language works237,207