MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2049696735 · doi:10.1097/rli.0b013e31817e909f

Diffusion Tensor Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Human Calf

2008· article· en· W2049696735 on OpenAlex
Nadja Saupe, Lawrence M. White, Marshall S. Sussman, Andrea Kassner, George Tomlinson, Michael D. Noseworthy

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

VenueInvestigative Radiology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiffusion MRIFractional anisotropyMagnetic resonance imagingNuclear magnetic resonanceAnisotropyPhysicsNuclear medicineMedicineOpticsRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To compare diffusion tensor-magnetic resonance imaging (DT-MRI) of human calf muscles at 1.5 T and 3.0 T, and to measure a number of quantitative parameters to characterize diffusion anisotropy in organized muscle tissue using similar imaging parameters. METHODS AND MATERIALS: After Institutional Review Board approval and informed consent, five healthy volunteers were studied. Imaging was performed on both 1.5 T and 3.0 T MR systems using the similar imaging protocol. Diffusion-sensitized single-shot spin-echo echo planar imaging pulse sequences were used to collect 2-dimensional images through the calf. Imaging was performed using b-values of 0, 300, 500, and 700 s/mm. Image analyses and tensor calculations were performed offline using DT imaging studio (Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD). The eigenvalues (lambda1, lambda2, lambda3), trace of the diffusion tensor (TrD), fractional anisotropy, relative anisotropy, and volume ratio were calculated in 3 different calf muscles (medial and lateral gastrocnemius and soleus). Signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) were compared for both field strengths (1.5 T and 3.0 T), the different muscles and all b-values. A regression analysis was performed to look at within-subject effects (linear mixed effect model). RESULTS: No significant differences were found between all quantitative measured DT-MRI parameters, b-values, and muscle groups at 3.0 T and 1.5 T (P = 0.105; P = 0.719). The mean of SNR on the 2 different field strengths (3.0:1.5 T) was 1.64, which was significantly different (P < 0.0001). Significant differences in SNR in all 3 muscles were found between sequences using b = 300 s/mm and 700 s/mm (P < 0.001; P = 0.006) and between sequences using b = 300 s/mm and 500 s/mm (P < 0.001; P = 0.03), and 500 s/mm and 700 s/mm (P = 0.005; P = 0.03), respectively, for medial gastrocnemius and soleus muscle. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates useful parameters to perform DT-MRI at 1.5 T and 3.0 T. DT-MRI at 1.5 T and 3.0 T provide in vivo validation of quantitative structural analysis of human skeleletal muscle.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.350
Threshold uncertainty score0.742

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 studies0.0000.002
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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.252 · 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