Analyzer-based imaging of spinal fusion in an animal model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Analyzer-based imaging (ABI) utilizes synchrotron radiation sources to create collimated monochromatic x-rays. In addition to x-ray absorption, this technique uses refraction and scatter rejection to create images. ABI provides dramatically improved contrast over standard imaging techniques. Twenty-one adult male Wistar rats were divided into four experimental groups to undergo the following interventions: (1) non-injured control, (2) decortication alone, (3) decortication with iliac crest bone grafting and (4) decortication with iliac crest bone grafting and interspinous wiring. Surgical procedures were performed at the L5-6 level. Animals were killed at 2, 4 and 6 weeks after the intervention and the spine muscle blocks were excised. Specimens were assessed for the presence of fusion by (1) manual testing, (2) conventional absorption radiography and (3) ABI. ABI showed no evidence of bone fusion in groups 1 and 2 and showed solid or possibly solid fusion in subjects from groups 3 and 4 at 6 weeks. Metal artifacts were not present in any of the ABI images. Conventional absorption radiographs did not provide diagnostic quality imaging of either the graft material or fusion masses in any of the specimens in any of the groups. Synchrotron-based ABI represents a novel imaging technique which can be used to assess spinal fusion in a small animal model. ABI produces superior image quality when compared to conventional radiographs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".