MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113203787 · doi:10.2522/ptj.20110380

Quantitative Paraspinal Muscle Measurements: Inter-Software Reliability and Agreement Using OsiriX and ImageJ

2012· article· en· W2113203787 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

VenuePhysical Therapy · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultifidus muscleIntraclass correlationReliability (semiconductor)LumbarComputer scienceSoftwareIntra-rater reliabilityProtocol (science)MedicineMagnetic resonance imagingStandard errorBiomedical engineeringLow back painReproducibilityAnatomyRadiologyPathologyMathematicsStatisticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Variations in paraspinal muscle cross-sectional area (CSA) and composition, particularly of the multifidus muscle, have been of interest with respect to risk of, and recovery from, low back pain problems. Several investigators have reported on the reliability of such muscle measurements using various protocols and image analysis programs. However, there is no standard protocol for tissue segmentation, nor has there been an investigation of reliability or agreement of measurements using different software. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to provide a detailed muscle measurement protocol and determine the reliability and agreement of associated paraspinal muscle composition measurements obtained with 2 commonly used image analysis programs: OsiriX and ImageJ. DESIGN: This was a measurement reliability study. METHODS: Lumbar magnetic resonance images of 30 individuals were randomly selected from a cohort of patients with various low back conditions. Muscle CSA and composition measurements were acquired from axial T2-weighted magnetic resonance images of the multifidus muscle, the erector spinae muscle, and the 2 muscles combined at L4-L5 and S1 for each participant. All measurements were repeated twice using each software program, at least 5 days apart. The assessor was blinded to all earlier measurements. RESULTS: The intrarater reliability and standard error of measurement (SEM) were comparable for most measurements obtained using OsiriX or ImageJ, with reliability coefficients (intraclass correlation coefficients [ICCs]) varying between .77 and .99 for OsiriX and .78 and .99 for ImageJ. There was similarly excellent agreement between muscle composition measurements using the 2 software applications (inter-software ICCs = .81-.99). LIMITATIONS: The high degree of inter-software measurement reliability may not generalize to protocols using other commercial or custom-made software. CONCLUSION: The proposed method to investigate paraspinal muscle CSA, composition, and side-to-side asymmetry was highly reliable, with excellent agreement between the 2 software programs.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.753
Threshold uncertainty score0.388

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.294 · 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