Is flow in the common carotid artery fully developed?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The assumption of fully developed or axisymmetric velocity profiles in the common carotid artery (CCA) underlies the straightforward estimation of CCA blood flow rates or wall shear stresses (WSS) from limited velocity data, such as spectral peak velocities acquired using Doppler ultrasound. Using an automated velocity profile classifier developed for this study, we characterized the shape of the CCA velocity profile from cine phase contrast magnetic resonance images acquired as part of an Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) ancillary study, here focusing on 45 participants imaged twice as part of a repeatability protocol. When averaged over the cardiac cycle, roughly 60% of the velocity profiles were classified as skewed, with over half of these exhibiting the crescent shape characteristic of strong Dean-type flow in a curved tube. During early diastole, roughly 80% of the velocity profiles were skewed. In most cases the degree and orientation of skewing were reproduced in the repeat scan, indicating the persistence of these flow features. Fully developed flow thus appears to be the exception rather than the rule in the nominally straight CCA. Implications of this for flow rate and WSS estimation, and perhaps the development and progression of carotid atherosclerosis, warrant further investigation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".