MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073739196 · doi:10.1159/000070672

MR Imaging of Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Cardiomyopathy: Morphologic Findings and Interobserver Reliability

2003· article· en· W2073739196 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

VenueCardiology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Effects of Exercise
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineArrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasiaVentricleMagnetic resonance imagingDysplasiaCardiologyCardiomyopathyInternal medicineRadiologyHeart failure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging is frequently used to diagnose arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy/dysplasia (ARVC/D). However, the reliability of various MR imaging features for diagnosing ARVC/D is unknown. The purpose of this study was to determine which morphologic MR imaging features have the greatest interobserver reliability for diagnosing ARVC/D. METHODS: Forty-five sets of films of cardiac MR images were sent to 8 radiologists and 5 cardiologists with experience in this field. There were 7 cases of definite ARVC/D as defined by the Task Force criteria. Six cases were controls. The remaining 32 cases had MR imaging because of clinical suspicion of ARVC/D. Readers evaluated the images for the presence of (a) right ventricle (RV) enlargement, (b) RV abnormal morphology, (c) left ventricle enlargement, (d) presence of high T(1) signal (fat) in the myocardium, and (e) location of high T(1) signal (fat) on a Likert scale with formatted responses. RESULTS: Readers indicated that the Task Force ARVC/D cases had significantly more (chi(2) = 119.93, d.f. = 10, p < 0.0001) RV chamber size enlargement (58%) than either the suspected ARVC/D (12%) or no ARVC/D (14%) cases. When readers reported the RV chamber size as enlarged they were significantly more likely to report the case as ARVC/D present (chi(2)(= )33.98, d.f. = 1, p < 0.0001). When readers reported the morphology as abnormal they were more likely to diagnose the case as ARVC/D present (chi(2) = 78.4, d.f. = 1, p < 0.0001), and the Task Force ARVC/D (47%) cases received significantly more abnormal reports than either suspected ARVC/D (20%) or non-ARVC/D (15%) cases. There was no significant difference between patient groups in the reported presence of high signal intensity (fat) in the RV (chi(2) = 0.9, d.f. = 2, p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Reviewers found that the size and shape of abnormalities in the RV are key MR imaging discriminates of ARVD. Subsequent protocol development and multicenter trials need to address these parameters. Essential steps in improving accuracy and reducing variability include a standardized acquisition protocol and standardized analysis with dynamic cine review of regional RV function and quantification of RV and left ventricle volumes.

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)0.001
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 score0.107
Threshold uncertainty score0.800

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.223 · 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