MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2076450230 · doi:10.1148/radiol.14140754

Accuracy of MR Imaging–estimated Proton Density Fat Fraction for Classification of Dichotomized Histologic Steatosis Grades in Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease

2014· article· en· W2076450230 on OpenAlexfundno aff
An Tang, Ajinkya Desai, Gavin Hamilton, Tanya Wolfson, Anthony Gamst, Jessica Lam, Lisa Clark, Jonathan Hooker, Tanya Chavez, Brandon Ang, Michael S. Middleton, Michael R. Peterson, Rohit Loomba, Claude B. Sirlin

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineNonalcoholic fatty liver diseaseSteatosisMagnetic resonance imagingConfidence intervalFatty liverProspective cohort studyNuclear medicineRadiologyInternal medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of previously proposed high-specificity magnetic resonance (MR) imaging-estimated proton density fat fraction (PDFF) thresholds for diagnosis of steatosis grade 1 or higher (PDFF threshold of 6.4%), grade 2 or higher (PDFF threshold of 17.4%), and grade 3 (PDFF threshold of 22.1%) by using histologic findings as a reference in an independent cohort of adults known to have or suspected of having nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective, cross-sectional, institutional review board-approved, HIPAA-compliant single-center study was conducted in an independent cohort of 89 adults known to have or suspected of having NAFLD who underwent contemporaneous liver biopsy. MR imaging PDFF was estimated at 3 T by using magnitude-based low-flip-angle multiecho gradient-recalled-echo imaging with T2* correction and multipeak modeling. Steatosis was graded histologically (grades 0, 1, 2, and 3, according to the Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis Clinical Research Network scoring system). Sensitivity, specificity, and binomial confidence intervals were calculated for the proposed MR imaging PDFF thresholds. RESULTS: The proposed MR imaging PDFF threshold of 6.4% to diagnose grade 1 or higher steatosis had 86% sensitivity (71 of 83 patients; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 76, 92) and 83% specificity (five of six patients; 95% CI: 36, 100). The threshold of 17.4% to diagnose grade 2 or higher steatosis had 64% sensitivity (28 of 44 patients; 95% CI: 48, 78) and 96% specificity (43 of 45 patients; 95% CI: 85, 100). The threshold of 22.1% to diagnose grade 3 steatosis had 71% sensitivity (10 of 14 patients; 95% CI: 42, 92) and 92% specificity (69 of 75 patients; 95% CI: 83, 97). CONCLUSION: In an independent cohort of adults known to have or suspected of having NAFLD, the previously proposed MR imaging PDFF thresholds provided moderate to high sensitivity and high specificity for diagnosis of grade 1 or higher, grade 2 or higher, and grade 3 steatosis. Prospective multicenter studies are now needed to further validate these high-specificity thresholds.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Citations343
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiologySame topicLiver Disease Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207