MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146141649 · doi:10.5430/jbgc.v4n2p8

Short-term Precision Error in Dual Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry, Bone Mineral Density and Trabecular Bone Score Measurements; and Effects of Obesity on Precision Error

2014· article· en· W2146141649 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
S Hopkins, Joanne R. Welsman, Karen Knapp

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomedical Graphics and Computing · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and osteoporosis research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrabecular bone scoreBone mineralMedicineOsteopeniaOsteoporosisDual-energy X-ray absorptiometryCoefficient of variationAccuracy and precisionNuclear medicineBody mass indexDual energyBone densityOrthodonticsQuantitative computed tomographyMathematicsInternal medicineStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Bone mineral density (BMD) measured by dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the primary screening tool for diagnosis of osteopenia and osteoporosis. BMD alone does not provide information regarding the structural characteristics of bone and this limitation has been a driver for the development of techniques, including trabecular bone score (TBS) software, to assess bone microarchitecture. Precision error in DXA is important for accurately monitoring changes in BMD and it has been demonstrated that BMD precision error increases with increasing body mass index (BMI). Information on in vivo precision error for TBS is very limited. This study evaluated short-term precision error (STPE) of lumbar spine BMD & TBS measurement, and investigated the effect of obesity on DXA precision error. Method: DXA lumbar spine scans (L1-L4) were performed using GE Lunar Prodigy. STPE was measured in ninety-one women at a single visit by duplicating scans with repositioning in-between. Precision error was calculated as the percentage coefficient of variation. Participants were sub-divided into four groups based on BMI to assess the effect of obesity on STPE. Results: STPE is poorer for TBS than for BMD. STPE is adversely affected for both BMD and TBS measurements by increasing BMI but this effect is mitigated for TBS in the highest BMI category where use of the thick scanning mode improves signal to noise ratio. Conclusion: Results from serial BMD and TBS measurements should take account of differences in precision error in the two techniques and in different BMI categories.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.057
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.057
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biomedical Graphics and ComputingSame topicBone health and osteoporosis researchFrench-language works237,207