MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081236653 · doi:10.1002/jmri.20310

Comparison of qualitative and quantitative measurements on unenhanced T1‐weighted fat saturation MR images in predicting pancreatic pathology

2005· article· en· W2081236653 on OpenAlexaff
B. Gallix, P M Bret, Mostafa Atri, R. Lecesne, Caroline Reinhold

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatitis Pathology and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPancreasMedicineReceiver operating characteristicConcordancePancreatitisPancreatic diseaseGastroenterologyAcute pancreatitisSpleenInternal medicineRadiologyPathologyNuclear medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To evaluate the accuracy of signal intensity (SI) analysis on unenhanced fat-suppressed T1-weighted MR images in the diagnosis of pancreatic disease and to compare subjective interpretation with different quantitative measurements. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The pancreas was evaluated in 159 patients (86 normal and 73 with pancreatic disease) with spoiled gradient echo (GRE) T1-weighted fat saturation MR images. The relative SI of the pancreas to liver and spleen was quantitatively measured using regions of interest (ROIs) and qualitatively assessed by two independent observers. RESULTS: The mean values between a normal and an abnormal pancreas with pancreas-liver ratios of 0.14 +/- 0.37 vs. -0.32 +/- 0.24, respectively, and pancreas-spleen ratios of 0.89 +/- 0.55 vs. 0.02 +/- 0.43, respectively, were significantly different (P < 0.001). The pancreas-liver SI ratio was significantly better than the pancreas-spleen ratio throughout the disease group (area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve +/- SD; 0.92 +/- 0.02 for pancreas-liver vs. 0.86 +/- 0.03 for pancreas-spleen, P < 0.01), and after excluding cases of acute pancreatitis (0.96 +/- 0.02 for pancreas-liver vs. 0.89 +/- 0.03 for pancreas-spleen, P < 0.01). There was no statistically significant difference between quantitative and qualitative analysis (area under the ROC curve +/- SD; 0.93 +/- 0.02 vs. 0.93 +/- 0.02 for the entire disease group; excluding acute pancreatitis 0.96 +/- 0.02 vs 0.97 +/- 0.02) for the diagnosis of pancreatic disease when using liver as internal standard. The interobserver concordance was very good (kappa > 0.71). The sensitivity of visual liver comparison was 80% in the entire disease group and 91% after the cases of acute pancreatitis were excluded, while specificity was 93%. CONCLUSION: The pancreas-liver ratio is the best quantitative means of distinguishing normal from abnormal pancreas. Visual observation by experienced observers (qualitative measurement) was just as accurate as quantitative measurement. Detection of pancreatic pathology can be made with high accuracy by visually comparing the SI of the pancreas with that of the normal liver.

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 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 score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score0.582

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations23
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Magnetic Resonance ImagingSame topicPancreatitis Pathology and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207