Intra- and Interobserver Variability of Cochlear Length Measurements in Clinical CT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
HYPOTHESIS: The cochlear A-value measurement exhibits significant inter- and intraobserver variability, and its accuracy is dependent on the visualization method in clinical computed tomography (CT) images of the cochlea. BACKGROUND: An accurate estimate of the cochlear duct length (CDL) can be used to determine electrode choice, and frequency map the cochlea based on the Greenwood equation. Studies have described estimating the CDL using a single A-value measurement, however the observer variability has not been assessed. METHODS: Clinical and micro-CT images of 20 cadaveric cochleae were acquired. Four specialists measured A-values on clinical CT images using both standard views and multiplanar reconstructed (MPR) views. Measurements were repeated to assess for intraobserver variability. Observer variabilities were evaluated using intra-class correlation and absolute differences. Accuracy was evaluated by comparison to the gold standard micro-CT images of the same specimens. RESULTS: Interobserver variability was good (average absolute difference: 0.77 ± 0.42 mm) using standard views and fair (average absolute difference: 0.90 ± 0.31 mm) using MPR views. Intraobserver variability had an average absolute difference of 0.31 ± 0.09 mm for the standard views and 0.38 ± 0.17 mm for the MPR views. MPR view measurements were more accurate than standard views, with average relative errors of 9.5 and 14.5%, respectively. CONCLUSION: There was significant observer variability in A-value measurements using both the standard and MPR views. Creating the MPR views increased variability between experts, however MPR views yielded more accurate results. Automated A-value measurement algorithms may help to reduce variability and increase accuracy in the future.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".