MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2186016461 · doi:10.33549/physiolres.931937

In Situ Assessment of the Brain Microcirculation in Mechanically-Ventilated Rabbits Using Sidestream Dark-Field (SDF) Imaging

2011· article· en· W2186016461 on OpenAlexaff
Michal Šitina, Z. Turek, R Pařízková, Viktor Černý

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysiological Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrocirculationBiomedical engineeringMedicineCerebral blood flowRadiologyAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Assessment of the cerebral microcirculation by on-line visualization has been impossible for a long time. Sidestream dark-field (SDF) imaging is a relatively new method allowing direct visualization of cerebral surface layer microcirculation using hand-held probe for direct contact with target tissue. The aim of this study was to elucidate the feasibility of studying the cerebral microcirculation in situ by SDF imaging and to assess the basic cerebral microcirculatory parameters in mechanically ventilated rabbits. Images were obtained using SDF imaging from the surface of the brain via craniotomy. Clear high contrast SDF images were successfully obtained. Total small-vessel density was 14.6+/-1.8 mm/mm(2), total all-vessel density was 17.9+/-1.7 mm/mm(2), DeBacker score was 12.0+/-1.6 mm(-1) and microvascular flow index was 3.0+/-0.0. This method seems to be applicable in animal studies with possibility to use SDF imaging also intraoperatively, providing unique opportunity to study cerebral microcirculation during various experimental and clinical settings.

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)0.000
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 score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.193
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations12
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysiological ResearchSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular DisturbancesFrench-language works237,207