MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047751376 · doi:10.1002/mrm.20352

Venous refocusing for volume estimation: VERVE functional magnetic resonance imaging

2005· article· en· W2047751376 on OpenAlexafffund
Bojana Stefanovic, G. Bruce Pike

Bibliographic record

VenueMagnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsBlood volumeMagnetic resonance imagingFunctional magnetic resonance imagingVenous bloodBlood oxygenationSIGNAL (programming language)Nuclear magnetic resonanceRelaxometryNuclear medicineChemistryMedicineSpin echoCardiologyRadiologyInternal medicineComputer sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A novel, noninvasive magnetic resonance imaging-based method for measuring changes in venous cerebral blood volume (CBV(v)) is presented. Venous refocusing for volume estimation (VERVE) exploits the dependency of the spin-spin relaxation rate of deoxygenated blood on the refocusing interval. Interleaved CPMG EPI acquisitions following a train of either tightly or sparsely spaced hard refocusing pulses (every 3.7 or 30 msec, respectively) at matched echo time were used to isolate the blood signal while minimizing the intravascular blood oxygenation level dependent (BOLD) signal contribution. The technique was employed to determine the steady-state increase in the CBV(v) in the visual cortex (VC) in seven healthy adult volunteers during flickering checkerboard photic stimulation. A functional activation model and a set of previously collected in vitro human whole blood relaxometry data were used to evaluate the intravascular BOLD effect on the VERVE signal. The average VC venous blood volume change was estimated to be 16 +/- 2%. This method has the potential to provide efficient and continuous monitoring of venous cerebral blood volume, thereby enabling further exploration of the mechanism underlying BOLD signal changes upon physiologic, pathophysiologic, and pharmacologic perturbations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations63
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMagnetic Resonance in MedicineSame topicAdvanced MRI Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207