MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2465173350 · doi:10.1177/0954411916658679

Post-euthanasia micro-computed tomography–based strain analysis is able to represent quasi-static in vivo behavior of whole vertebrae

2016· article· en· W2465173350 on OpenAlexaff
Chetan Choudhari, Ryan Herblum, Margarete K. Akens, Sara Moore, Michael Hardisty, Cari Whyne

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part H Journal of Engineering in Medicine · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMedical Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkSunnybrook HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputed tomographyIn vivoStrain (injury)TomographyBiomedical engineeringMaterials scienceStructural engineeringAnatomyRadiologyEngineeringMedicineBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Three-dimensional image-based strain measurement in whole bones allows representation of physiological, albeit quasi-static, loading conditions. However, such work to date has been limited to specimens postmortem. The main purpose of this study is to verify the efficacy of deformable image registration of post-euthanasia strain to characterize the in vivo mechanical behavior of rat vertebrae. A micro-computed tomography-compatible custom loading device was used to apply 75 N load to a three-level caudal motion segment of a healthy rat. Loaded and unloaded micro-computed tomography scans were acquired in vivo and post-sacrifice. A micro-computed tomography-based deformable image registration algorithm was used to calculate vertebral strains live and post-euthanasia. No significant difference was found in the in vivo strains (-0.011 ± 0.001) and ex vivo strains (-0.012 ± 0.001) obtained from the comparisons of loaded and unloaded images (p = 0.3). Comparisons between unloaded-unloaded and loaded-loaded scans yielded significantly lower axial strains, representing the error of the method. Qualitatively, high strains were observed adjacent to growth plate regions in evaluating the loaded-unloaded images. Strain patterns in the loaded-loaded and unloaded-unloaded scans were inconsistent as would be expected in representing noise. Overall, live and dead loaded to unloaded comparisons yielded similar strain patterns and magnitudes. Point-wise differences in axial strain fields also supported this observation. This study demonstrated a proof of concept, suggesting that post-euthanasia micro-computed tomography-based strain analysis is able to represent the in vivo quasi-static behavior of rat tail vertebrae.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score0.665

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.250
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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part H Journal of Engineering in MedicineSame topicMedical Imaging and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207