MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045851786 · doi:10.1063/1.3131425

Feasibility of Transient Image-guided Blood-Spinal Cord Barrier Disruption

2009· article· en· W2045851786 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAIP conference proceedings · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUltrasound and Hyperthermia Applications
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUltrasoundSpinal cordContrast (vision)MedicineCordBlood–brain barrierMagnetic resonance imagingBiomedical engineeringRadiologyCentral nervous systemSurgeryComputer scienceInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To evaluate the feasibility of disrupting the blood‐spinal cord barrier (BSCB), 31 rats were exposed to focused 1.08 MHz ultrasound at electrical powers of 0.5 W and 1.0 W after injection of the ultrasound contrast agent Definity. T1‐weighted images were acquired before and after ultrasound exposure using a 3 T MRI and the MR contrast agent Gadovist. At 0.5 and 1.0 W the average relative enhancements observed were 29.1±21% and 57.5±34% respectively. After recovery from ultrasound exposure, the rats did not show signs of motor impairment. The results demonstrate the feasibility of BSCB disruption using ultrasound together with ultrasound contrast agents. Further studies of this method are warranted.

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.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.795
Threshold uncertainty score0.584

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.249 · 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