MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047256435 · doi:10.2460/ajvr.68.3.297

Single-slice dynamic computed tomographic determination of glomerular filtration rate by use of Patlak plot analysis in anesthetized pigs

2007· article· en· W2047256435 on OpenAlexafffund
Kate Alexander, Jérôme R. E. del Castillo, Norma Ybarra, Valérie Morin, Domianique Gauvin, Simon Authier, Patrick Vinay, Éric Troncy

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Veterinary Research · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMRI in cancer diagnosis
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalHôpital Notre-DameUniversité de MontréalCegep de Saint Hyacinthe
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversité de MontréalHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsRenal functionIohexolKidneyMedicineHounsfield scaleNuclear medicinePAH clearanceRenal blood flowEffective renal plasma flowRadiologyComputed tomographyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To compare glomerular filtration rate (GFR) as estimated from Patlak plot analysis by use of single-slice computed tomography (CT) with that obtained from clearance of plasma inulin in pigs. ANIMALS: 8 healthy anesthetized juvenile pigs. PROCEDURES: All pigs underwent precontrast, whole-kidney, helical CT; postcontrast single-slice dynamic CT; and postcontrast, whole-kidney CT for volume determination. On dynamic images, corrected Hounsfield unit values were determined for each kidney and the aorta. A Patlak plot for each kidney was generated, and plasma clearance per unit volume was multiplied by renal volume to obtain whole-animal contrast clearance. Mean GFR determined via inulin clearance (Inu-GFR) was measured from each kidney and correlated to mean GFR determined via CT (CT-GFR) for the left kidney, right kidney, and both kidneys by use of linear regression and Bland-Altman analyses. RESULTS: CT-GFR results from 7 pigs were valid. Total and right kidney Inu-GFR were correlated with total and right kidney CT-GFR (total, R(2) = 0.85; right kidney, R(2) = 0.86). However, left kidney CT-GFR was poorly correlated with left kidney Inu-GFR (R(2) = 0.47). Bland-Altman analysis revealed no significant bias between Inu-GFR and CT-GFR for the left kidney, right kidney, or both kidneys. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: CT-GFR as determined by use of a single-slice acquisition technique, low-dose of iohexol, and Patlak plot analysis correlated without bias with Inu-GFR for the right kidney and both kidneys (combined). This technique has promise as an accurate CT-GFR method that can be combined with renal morphologic evaluation.

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 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)0.003
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.681
Threshold uncertainty score0.576

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.316 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations16
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Veterinary ResearchSame topicMRI in cancer diagnosisFrench-language works237,207