MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2088855321 · doi:10.1109/iembs.2011.6090764

In-vivo MRI and in-vivo electro-anatomical voltage map characteristics of infarct heterogeneity in a swine model

2011· article· en· W2088855321 on OpenAlexafffund
Elnaz Shokrollahi, Mihaela Pop, Muhamad Safri, Yi Yang, Perry Radau, J. Barry, Jay Detsky, Gregory H. Griffin, Eugene Crystal, Graham A. Wright

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook HospitalUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersBiosense WebsterCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsIn vivoMyocardial infarctionMagnetic resonance imagingContrast (vision)MedicineNuclear medicineBiomedical engineeringCardiologyInternal medicineComputer scienceRadiologyArtificial intelligenceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The arrhythmogenic substrate in patients with prior myocardial infarct (MI) is located at the border zone, BZ. In this study we correlated the BZ identified by two methods: electro-anatomical voltage mapping (EAVM) and a novel MRI method, multi-contrast late enhancement (MCLE). A pre-clinical porcine model with chronic MI was used to characterize BZ via MRI and EAVM. Results focus on the comparison between scar percentage and BZ percentage identified by each method. The correlation coefficient for BZ percentage between the two methods was 0.74 with a p-value of less the 0.0001. Bland-Altman plots were also used to compare between the two methods (slope of 0.83 ± 0.045). For a case of subtle infarct, there was only 1.3% infarct identified on EAVM compared to 22.2% on the corresponding slice on MCLE. The percentage of infarct on MCLE in subtle infarct does not relate to percentage of infarct in EAVM. Future registration between T(1) maps and EAVM will permit a quantitative comparison of MRI and EAVM measures.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations5
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias→French-language works237,207→