Comparison of Computed Tomography 3-Dimensional Volumetric Analysis of Ventricular Size to Visual Radiological Assessment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Interpretation of ventricular volume on computed tomography scans of hydrocephalus patients is usually subjective. The objective of this study was to determine whether radiological assessment of interval change correlates better with an objective calculated volume change or with other objective 2-dimensional estimates of ventricle volume change. METHODS/SAMPLE: Ventricular volume, Evans ratio, and frontal and occipital Horn ratio were retrospectively assessed on 95 pairs of scans from patients with a ventriculoperitoneal shunt. To determine ventricle volume, all voxels of cerebrospinal fluid density were isolated on a 3-dimensional reconstructed computed tomography scan. Voxels of fluid density contiguous with one another in the ventricular system were isolated. Radiological assessments of interval change were divided into 5 groups based on reported findings in the radiology report. The 95% mean confidence intervals were developed for changes in the measured parameters, given a particular radiological assessment. Multinomial regression was subsequently performed to determine which parameter was most closely correlated with the radiological assessment. RESULTS: Significant overlap was found in the confidence intervals for objectively calculated volume change between the different categories of radiological assessment. The frontal and occipital Horn ratio had the most consistent correlation with the radiological assessment, followed by the Evans ratio. Objectively calculated volume change correlated poorly with radiological assessment. CONCLUSIONS: Radiological interpretation does not correlate well with objectively calculated volume changes, but correlates better with other parameters that approximate volume and are likely used to visually evaluate interval change. We recommend that ventricle volume be objectively measured to increase consistency between radiological interpretation and actual interval changes.
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 | 0.003 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".