MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2592667920 · doi:10.1556/004.2017.001

Linear relationship found by magnetic resonance imaging between cerebrospinal fluid volume and body weight in dogs

2017· article· en· W2592667920 on OpenAlexaff
László Zoltán Reinitz, Gábor Bajzik, Rita Garamvölgyi, Bianka Benedek, Örs Petneházy, András Lassó, Zsolt Abonyi‐Tóth, Borbála Lőrincz, Péter Sótonyi

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Veterinaria Hungarica · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicCerebrospinal fluid and hydrocephalus
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCerebrospinal fluidLateral ventriclesMagnetic resonance imagingVentricleHydrocephalusMedicineAnatomyVentricular systemBody weightNuclear medicineCerebral ventricleVolume (thermodynamics)MyelographySpinal cordPathologyCardiologyRadiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite numerous studies on cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and its importance during hydrocephalus or myelography, no reliable values exist about its overall volume in dogs. In this study, our aim was to measure the intracranial (IC) volume of CSF in dogs and assess its possible relationship with body size and the symmetry of the lateral ventricles. We ran a 3D magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sequence on the central nervous system of 12 healthy, male mongrel dogs between 3-5 years of age and 7.5-35.0 kg body weight. A validated semiautomatic segmentation protocol was implemented to segment the CSF and measure its volume. Values for the volume of the ventricular compartment were between 0.97 and 2.94 ml, with 62.1 ± 11.7% in the lateral ventricles, 17.6 ± 4.9% in the third ventricle, 4.9 ± 1.6% in the aqueductus mesencephali and 15.5 ± 6.6% in the fourth ventricle. In 11 cases a significant asymmetry was found between the lateral ventricles. The results suggest that it may be normal for a dog to have one of the lateral ventricles 1.5 times larger than the other. The correlation between body weight and CSF volume was linear, indicating that the current dosage protocols for myelography, based on a hypothetical proportional relationship with body weight, may have to be revised.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.249
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.257 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa Veterinaria HungaricaSame topicCerebrospinal fluid and hydrocephalusFrench-language works237,207