Diffusion Tensor Imaging of the Normal Foot at 3 T
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to establish normative diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) eigenvalues (λ1,λ2,λ3), apparent diffusion coefficient, and fractional anisotropy in asymptomatic foot muscles. METHODS: Ten healthy adults (mean [SD], 25.9 [4.3] years) were examined using a 3-T magnetic resonance imaging scanner. Diffusion tensor imaging indices were evaluated in 5 muscles in the foot: quadratus plantae, abductor hallucis, flexor hallucis brevis, flexor digitorum brevis, and abductor digiti minimi. Signal-to-noise ratio was also measured for each muscle. RESULTS: In the various foot muscles, λ1 ranged from 1.88 × 10 to 2.14 × 10 mm/s, λ2 ranged from 1.39 × 10 to 1.48 × 10 mm/s, and λ3 ranged from 0.91 × 10 to 1.27 × 10 mm/s; apparent diffusion coefficient ranged from 1.48 × 10 to 1.55 × 10 mm/s; and fractional anisotropy ranged from 0.21 to 0.40. Statistical differences were seen in some eigenvalues between muscle pairs. Mean signal-to-noise ranged from 47.5 to 69.1 in the various muscles examined. CONCLUSIONS: Assessment of anisotropy of water diffusion in foot muscles was feasible using DTI. The measured DTI metrics in the foot were similar to those in calf and thigh skeletal muscles.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it