MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067229331 · doi:10.1117/1.2337529

In vivo assessment and evaluation of lung tissue morphologic and physiological changes from non-contact endoscopic reflectance spectroscopy for improving lung cancer detection

2006· article· en· W2067229331 on OpenAlex

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

VenueJournal of Biomedical Optics · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer AgencyUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLung cancerIn vivoPathologyBiomedical engineeringReflectivityLungMaterials scienceCancerMedicineOpticsBiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a method for lung cancer detection exploiting reflectance spectra measured in vivo during endoscopic imaging of the lung. The measured reflectance spectra were analyzed using a specially developed light-transport model to obtain quantitative information about cancer-related, physiological, and morphologic changes in the superficial bronchial mucosa layers. The light-transport model allowed us to obtain the absorption coefficient (mua) and further to derive the micro-vascular blood volume fraction in tissue and the tissue blood oxygen saturation. The model also allowed us to obtain the scattering coefficient (mus) and the anisotropy coefficient (g) and further to derive the tissue scattering micro-particle volume fraction and size distribution. The specular component of the reflectance signal and the instrument response were accounted for during the analysis. The method was validated using 100 reflectance spectra measured in vivo in a noncontact fashion from 22 lung patients (50 normal tissue/benign lesion sites and 50 malignant lesion sites). The classification between normal tissue/benign lesions and malignant lesions was further investigated using the derived quantitative parameters and discriminant function analysis. The results demonstrated significant differences between the normal tissue/benign lesions and the malignant lesions in terms of tissue blood volume fraction, blood oxygen saturation, tissue scatterer volume fractions, and size distribution. The results also showed that the malignant lung lesions can be differentiated from normal tissue/benign lesions with both diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of better than 80%.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.252
Threshold uncertainty score0.386

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.377 · 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