MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121005513 · doi:10.1002/jmri.20898

<i>T</i><sub>1</sub> measurement of flowing blood and arterial input function determination for quantitative 3D <i>T</i><sub>1</sub>‐weighted DCE‐MRI

2007· article· en· W2121005513 on OpenAlexaff
Hai‐Ling Margaret Cheng

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMRI in cancer diagnosis
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReproducibilityNuclear medicineBlood volumeBlood flowPartial volumePharmacokineticsBiomedical engineeringBolus (digestion)MedicineMathematicsRadiologyCardiologySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To propose a simple, accurate method for measuring T(1) in flowing blood and the arterial input function (AIF), and to evaluate the impact on dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) quantification of pharmacokinetic parameters. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 10 rabbits were scanned at 1.5 Tesla and administered a bolus of Gadomer. Preinjection T(1) and AIF measurements were acquired in the iliac arteries using a rapid three-dimensional (3D) spoiled gradient recalled echo (SPGR) approach. Correction was made for imperfect B(1) fields, in-flow, and partial volume effects. DCE-MRI parameters blood volume (v(b)) and endothelial transfer constant (K(trans)) in resting skeletal muscle were estimated from pharmacokinetic analysis using individually measured AIFs. Literature comparisons were made to assess accuracy. RESULTS: Blood T(1) was more accurate and precise after correction for B(1) and partial volume errors (1267 +/- 72 msec). Measured AIFs followed reported biexponential decay characteristics for Gadomer clearance in rabbits. Parameters v(b) (2.47 +/- 0.65%) and K(trans) (3.6 +/- 1.0 x 10(-3) minute(-1)) derived from AIFs based on corrected blood T(1)s were more reproducible and in better agreement with literature values. CONCLUSION: The proposed method enables accurate in vivo blood T(1) and AIF measurements and can be easily implemented in a range of DCE-MRI applications to improve both the accuracy and reproducibility of pharmacokinetic parameters.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations73
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Magnetic Resonance ImagingSame topicMRI in cancer diagnosisFrench-language works237,207