MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050722132 · doi:10.1002/mrm.10411

Is multicomponent <i>T</i><sub>2</sub> a good measure of myelin content in peripheral nerve?

2003· article· en· W2050722132 on OpenAlexaff
Stephanie Webb, Catherine A. Munro, Rajiv Midha, Greg J. Stanisz

Bibliographic record

VenueMagnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersCollege of Science and Health
KeywordsMyelinWallerian degenerationRemyelinationSciatic nerveMyelin sheathRelaxation (psychology)ChemistryPeripheral nervePathologyNeuroscienceNuclear magnetic resonanceAnatomyBiologyMedicineCentral nervous systemPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multicomponent T(2) relaxation of normal and injured rat sciatic nerve was measured. The T(2) relaxation was multiexponential, indicating the multicompartmental nature of T(2) decay in nerve tissue. The size of the short, observed T(2) component correlated very well with quantitative assessment of myelin using computer-assisted histopathological image analysis of myelin. Specifically, the size of the short T(2) component reflected the processes of myelin loss and remyelination accompanying Wallerian degeneration and regeneration following trauma. However, it represented all myelin present in the sample and did not distinguish between intact myelin and myelin debris. Other changes in T(2) spectra were also observed and could be correlated with axonal loss and inflammation. The study also questions the validity of previously offered interpretations of T(2) spectra of nerve.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 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

Citations170
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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