Clinical quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM): Biometal imaging and its emerging roles in patient care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM) has enabled magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of tissue magnetic susceptibility to advance from simple qualitative detection of hypointense blooming artifacts to precise quantitative measurement of spatial biodistributions. QSM technology may be regarded to be sufficiently developed and validated to warrant wide dissemination for clinical applications of imaging isotropic susceptibility, which is dominated by metals in tissue, including iron and calcium. These biometals are highly regulated as vital participants in normal cellular biochemistry, and their dysregulations are manifested in a variety of pathologic processes. Therefore, QSM can be used to assess important tissue functions and disease. To facilitate QSM clinical translation, this review aims to organize pertinent information for implementing a robust automated QSM technique in routine MRI practice and to summarize available knowledge on diseases for which QSM can be used to improve patient care. In brief, QSM can be generated with postprocessing whenever gradient echo MRI is performed. QSM can be useful for diseases that involve neurodegeneration, inflammation, hemorrhage, abnormal oxygen consumption, substantial alterations in highly paramagnetic cellular iron, bone mineralization, or pathologic calcification; and for all disorders in which MRI diagnosis or surveillance requires contrast agent injection. Clinicians may consider integrating QSM into their routine imaging practices by including gradient echo sequences in all relevant MRI protocols. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1 Technical Efficacy: Stage 5 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2017;46:951-971.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.005 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".