Does 3T Fetal MRI Improve Image Resolution of Normal Brain Structures between 20 and 24 Weeks' Gestational Age?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Stronger magnetic fields have the potential to improve fetal image resolution. Our objective was to detect whether there was better anatomic resolution of brain structures in fetuses imaged with a 3T magnet compared with a 1.5T magnet. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Multiple cerebral and facial anatomic structures were retrospectively assessed in 28 fetal MR imaging scans with normal findings (12 at 3T and 16 at 1.5T) with a 0-3 grading score. Fetuses were assessed during the second trimesters (gestational age, 20-24 weeks). The association between the quality ratings and magnetic field strengths (1.5T versus 3T) was evaluated by a linear mixed-effects model. A quantitative assessment of the signal intensity was also performed in the different layers of the developing brain. Comparative log-ratios were calculated across the different layers of the fetal brain. RESULTS: < .001). The cerebral structures of the cerebellum, pons, venous system, semicircular canal, and cochlea showed statistically significant higher values on the 3T magnet. Similarly, statistical significance was also obtained on the quantitative assessment of the multilayer appearance of the brain; the 3T magnet had a median factor of 8.38 higher than the 1.5T magnet (95% CI, 4.73-14.82). Other anatomic structures assessed in the supratentorial compartment of the brain showed higher values on the 3T magnet with no statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: Both magnets depict cerebral and facial normal anatomic structures; however, our data indicates better anatomic detail on the 3T than on the 1.5T magnet.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".