Proper Positioning and Restraint of a Rat Hind Limb for Focused High Resolution Imaging of Bone Micro-architecture Using <em>In Vivo</em> Micro-computed Tomography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of in vivo micro-computed tomography (µCT) is a powerful tool which involves the non-destructive imaging of internal structures at high resolutions in live animal models. This allows for repeated imaging of the same rodent over time. This feature not only reduces the total number of rodents required in an experimental design and thereby reduces the inter-subject variation that can arise, but also allows researchers to assess longitudinal or life-long responses to an intervention. To acquire high quality images that can be processed and analyzed to more accurately quantify outcomes of bone micro-architecture, users of in vivo µCT scanners must properly anesthetize the rat, and position and restrain the hind limb. To do this, it is imperative that the rat be anesthetized to a level of complete relaxation, and that pedal reflexes are lost. These guidelines may be modified for each individual rat, as the rate of isoflurane metabolism can vary depending on strain and body size. Proper technique for in vivo µCT image acquisition enables accurate and consistent measurement of bone micro-architecture within and across studies.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".