MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2468504787 · doi:10.1118/1.4955886

SU‐F‐I‐58: Image Quality Comparisons of Different Motion Magnitudes and TR Values in MR‐PET

2016· article· en· W2468504787 on OpenAlexaff
John Patrick, M. Ali Tavallaei, Richard B. Thompson, Robert Z. Stodilka, Maria Drangova, Stewart Gaede

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityRobarts Clinical TrialsLawson Health Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImaging phantomNuclear medicinePhysicsImage qualityCoronal planeSagittal planeCorrection for attenuationNuclear magnetic resonanceAttenuationMedicineOpticsRadiologyArtificial intelligenceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: The aim of this work is to evaluate the accuracy and sensitivity of a respiratory‐triggered MR‐PET protocol in detecting four different sized lesions at two different magnitudes of motion, with two different TR values, using a novel PET‐MR‐CT compatible respiratory motion phantom. Methods: The eight‐compartment torso phantom was setup adjacent to the motion stage, which moved four spherical compartments (28, 22, 17, 10 mm diameter) in two separate (1 and 2 cm) linear motion profiles, simulating a 3.5 second respiratory cycle. Scans were acquired on a 3T MR‐PET system (Biograph mMR; Siemens Medical Solutions, Germany). MR measurements were taken with: 1) Respiratory‐triggered T2‐weighted turbo spin echo (BLADE) sequence in coronal orientation, and 2) Real‐time balanced steady‐state gradient echo sequence (TrueFISP) in coronal and sagittal planes. PET was acquired simultaneously with MR. Sphere geometries and motion profiles were measured and compared with ground truths for T2 BLADE‐TSE acquisitions and real time TrueFISP images. PET quantification and geometry measurements were taken using standardized uptake values, voxel intensity plots and were compared with known values, and examined alongside MR‐based attenuation maps. Contrast and signal‐to‐noise ratios were also compared for each of the acquisitions as functions of motion range and TR. Results: Comparison of lesion diameters indicate the respiratory triggered T2 BLADE‐TSE was able to maintain geometry within −2 mm for 1 cm motion for both TR values, and within −3.1 mm for TR = 2000 ms at 2 cm motion. Sphere measurements in respiratory triggered PET images were accurate within +/− 5 mm for both ranges of motion for 28, 22, and 17 mm diameter spheres. Conclusion: Hybrid MR‐PET systems show promise in imaging lung cancer in non‐compliant patients, with their ability to acquire both modalities simultaneously. However, MR‐based attenuation maps are still susceptible to motion derived artifacts and pose the potential to affect PET accuracy.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.332 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical Physics→Same topicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications→French-language works237,207→