Diameter of the normal fetal thymus on ultrasound
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To present the normative data of the transverse diameter of the developing fetal thymus. METHODS: In this prospective study, the maximum transverse diameter of the thymus was measured by one sonologist in 376 normal fetuses between 19 and 38 weeks of gestation. We assessed the relationship of the transverse thymic diameter with gestational age (GA), biparietal diameter, femur length and abdominal circumference using general linear regression modeling. The predicted mean and 95% reference range of thymic diameter at each GA were calculated from the regression equation. RESULTS: Measurements of the transverse diameter were possible in 352 of the 376 (94%) fetuses. The transverse diameter of the fetal thymus increased with increasing GA and fetal size parameters in a linear manner. The regression equation for transverse diameter of the thymus as a function of GA was: thymic diameter (cm) = 0.15 x GA (weeks) - 1.59 (r(2) = 0.86, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The transverse diameter of the fetal thymus is easy to measure; this study presents normative data.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".