Apparent Diffusion Coefficient of the Placenta in Twin versus Singleton Pregnancies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous studies in singleton pregnancies reported conflicting trends in apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values with gestational age (GA) and stable relative ADC (rADC; ADC placenta divided by ADC globe) throughout pregnancy. The purpose of our study was to compare the ADC and rADC of placentas of twin and singleton pregnancies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fetal MRI of 11 twin and 23 singleton pregnancies were retrospectively analyzed. Each group was further divided by GA (≤24 and >24 weeks). On ADC, 3 regions of interest were selected in the placenta and 1 in the globe. ADC and rADC measurements were compared between different GA and between singleton and twin placentas. RESULTS: No significant difference was shown between ADC and rADC values of singleton and twin placentas as well as between ADC and rADC values of singleton and twin placentas at different GA. No significant difference was shown when accounting for both GA and number of fetuses. CONCLUSION: The diffusion characteristics of twin placentas are similar to those of singleton placentas. ADC and rADC remain stable throughout pregnancy in twin and singleton placentas, reflecting stable extracellular water diffusion, despite changes associated with placental maturation.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".