MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139210381 · doi:10.1148/rg.287085031

Pediatric MR Cholangiopancreatography: Principles, Technique, and Clinical Applications

2008· review· en· W2139210381 on OpenAlexaff
Govind B. Chavhan, Paul Babyn, David Manson, Logi Vidarsson

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiographics · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPediatric Hepatobiliary Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMagnetic resonance cholangiopancreatographyRadiologyEndoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographyImage qualityPancreatitisMagnetic resonance imagingSedationCholedochal cystsCystSurgeryArtificial intelligenceImage (mathematics)Computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High-quality magnetic resonance (MR) cholangiopancreatographic images are difficult to obtain in children due to the small caliber of the pediatric bile ducts and to motion artifacts. However, there has been ongoing improvement in image quality, thanks to better coil technology, increased speed of acquisition, refinement in respiratory compensation techniques, and newer sequences. Heavily T2-weighted fast spin-echo (FSE) and single-shot FSE MR imaging sequences with long echo times are used to image the biliary and pancreatic ducts. Secretin has been shown to improve the visualization of the pancreatic duct and pancreaticobiliary junction. Factors that affect image quality in pediatric MR cholangiopancreatography include sedation, negative oral contrast material, radiofrequency coil selection, respiratory compensation techniques, echo time, echo train length, section-slab thickness, planes of scanning, field of view, and number of signals acquired. However, giving proper attention to these factors and tailoring the study to the body size of the patient (which varies considerably) can lead to high-quality diagnostic MR cholangiopancreatographic images. Use of MR cholangiopancreatography in children is limited by the need for sedation or anesthesia, high cost, limited availability, and long scanning times. Nonetheless, this modality can be a viable alternative to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in the evaluation of various entities such as choledochal cyst, recurrent pancreatitis, primary sclerosing cholangitis, and a transplanted liver, and may obviate ERCP.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.312 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations94
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiographicsSame topicPediatric Hepatobiliary Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207