MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2546884239 · doi:10.1109/ultsym.2016.7728830

Blood pressure dependent elasticity measurements of porcine kidney ex-vivo

2016· article· en· W2546884239 on OpenAlexaff
Caitlin Schneider, Mohammad Honarvar, Julio Lobo, Robert Rohling, Septimiu E. Salcudean, Samir Bidnur, Christopher Nguan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound Imaging and Elastography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElasticity (physics)ElastographyKidney transplantationMedicineEx vivoTransplantationKidneyUltrasoundBiomedical engineeringNephrologyBlood pressureInternal medicineCardiologyIn vivoUrologyRadiologyMaterials scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kidney transplantation is standard of care for end-stage renal failure. Monitoring graft health after transplantation to ensure graft longevity is important and usually carried out through the use of biopsy. Ultrasound elastography has the potential to allow regular non-invasive monitoring of graft health via the level of fibrosis. Results of kidney elastography research to date have been variable. It is hypothesized that the changes in blood pressure are a confounding factor in elasticity measurements and may explain the varied results. Using a controlled set-up on porcine kidneys ex-vivo, the effects of changes in pressure with flow from a peristaltic pump were examined (n=5). Each kidney was measured from 0 mmHg to 130 mmHg. It was found that the measured elasticity of the kidney was dependent on the input pressure of the pump. Increasing the input pressure resulted in an increase in the measured elasticity, from an average 21 ± 3 kPa at 0 mmHg to approximately 34 ± 9 kPa at 130 mmHg. These results suggest that the phase of the cardiac cycle be considered in kidney elastography using electrocardiogram (ECG) monitoring.

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)0.001
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 score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUltrasound Imaging and ElastographyFrench-language works237,207