Histogram Analysis of Native T<sub>1</sub> Mapping and Its Relationship to Left Ventricular Late Gadolinium Enhancement, Hypertrophy, and Segmental Myocardial Mechanics in Patients With Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background The use of native T 1 mapping for evaluation of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is being explored, and its combination with histogram analysis may benefit the accuracy of such assessments. Purpose To investigate the relationship of segmental left ventricular wall thickness (LVWT), myocardial fibrosis, and strain parameters with segmental histogram parameters of native T 1 mapping in HCM patients. Study Type Retrospective. Subjects Ninety‐three HCM patients without previous cardiovascular diseases were included. Field Strength/Sequence 3.0T cardiac MR. Steady‐state free precession cine imaging, modified Look–Locker inversion recovery, phase‐sensitive inversion recovery. Assessment Images were assessed by three experienced radiologists. Statistical Tests Mann–Whitney U ‐tests, area under the curve (AUC), Spearman's rank correlation, intraclass correlation coefficient, and Bland–Altman test were used for statistical analysis. Results A higher LVWT value correlated with higher means, minimums, 10 th /25 th /50 th /75 th /90 th percentiles, maximums, kurtosis, entropy, and lower SD and energy of T 1 mapping ( P < 0.05 for all), with the correlation being stronger for entropy and energy (Spearman's rho = 0.439 and –0.413, respectively) than other parameters. Late gadolinium enhancement positive (LGE+) segments exhibited higher mean, minimum, 10 th /25 th /50 th /75 th /90 th percentiles, maximum, entropy, and lower energy of T 1 times than late gadolinium enhancement negative (LGE–) segments ( P < 0.001 for all). Impaired strain function parameters (peak thickening and thickening rate in radial, circumferential, and longitudinal directions) demonstrated a weak correlation with higher entropy ( P < 0.001 for all) and lower energy ( P < 0.001 for all). Data Conclusion Histogram parameters of native T 1 mapping provide more information than mean T 1 times alone. Among these parameters, entropy and energy may correlate better with LVWT, myocardial late gadolinium enhancement, and strain parameters than mean T 1 times in HCM patients. Level of Evidence : 2 Technical Efficacy Stage : 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019;49:668–677.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".