MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2892155071 · doi:10.1097/rli.0000000000000510

Linearity, Bias, Intrascanner Repeatability, and Interscanner Reproducibility of Quantitative Multidynamic Multiecho Sequence for Rapid Simultaneous Relaxometry at 3 T

2018· article· en· W2892155071 on OpenAlexaff
Akifumi Hagiwara, Masaaki Hori, Julien Cohen‐Adad, M. Nakazawa, Yuichi Suzuki, Akihiro Kasahara, Moeko Horita, Takuya Haruyama, Christina Andica, Tomoko Maekawa, Koji Kamagata, Kanako K. Kumamaru, Osamu Abe, Shigeki Aoki

Bibliographic record

VenueInvestigative Radiology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRepeatabilityReproducibilityImaging phantomRelaxometryVolunteerNuclear medicineLinearityNuclear magnetic resonanceMedicineMagnetic resonance imagingChemistryRadiologyChromatographyPhysicsSpin echo

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the linearity, bias, intrascanner repeatability, and interscanner reproducibility of quantitative values derived from a multidynamic multiecho (MDME) sequence for rapid simultaneous relaxometry. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The NIST/ISMRM (National Institute of Standards and Technology/International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine) phantom, containing spheres with standardized T1 and T2 relaxation times and proton density (PD), and 10 healthy volunteers, were scanned 10 times on different days and 2 times during the same session, using the MDME sequence, on three 3 T scanners from different vendors. For healthy volunteers, brain volumetry and myelin estimation were performed based on the measured T1, T2, and PD. The measured phantom values were compared with reference values; volunteer values were compared with their averages across 3 scanners. RESULTS: The linearity of both phantom and volunteer measurements in T1, T2, and PD values was very strong (R = 0.973-1.000, 0.979-1.000, and 0.982-0.999, respectively) The highest intrascanner coefficients of variation (CVs) for T1, T2, and PD were 2.07%, 7.60%, and 12.86% for phantom data, and 1.33%, 0.89%, and 0.77% for volunteer data, respectively. The highest interscanner CVs of T1, T2, and PD were 10.86%, 15.27%, and 9.95% for phantom data, and 3.15%, 5.76%, and 3.21% for volunteer data, respectively. Variation of T1 and T2 tended to be larger at higher values outside the range of those typically observed in brain tissue. The highest intrascanner and interscanner CVs for brain tissue volumetry were 2.50% and 5.74%, respectively, for cerebrospinal fluid. CONCLUSIONS: Quantitative values derived from the MDME sequence are overall robust for brain relaxometry and volumetry on 3 T scanners from different vendors. Caution is warranted when applying MDME sequence on anatomies with relaxometry values outside the range of those typically observed in brain tissue.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.101

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.116
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.270 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations117
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInvestigative RadiologySame topicAdvanced MRI Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207