Reflected hemodynamic waves influence the pattern of Doppler ultrasound waveforms along the umbilical arteries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The pulsatile pattern of blood motion measured by Doppler ultrasound within the umbilical artery is known to contain useful diagnostic information and is widely used to monitor pregnancies at risk of fetal growth restriction or stillbirth. Animal studies have identified reflected pressure waves traveling counter to the direction of blood flow as an important factor in the shape of these waveforms. In the present study, we establish a method to measure reflected waves in the human umbilical artery and assess their influence on blood velocity pulsation. Ninety-five pregnant women were recruited from a general obstetrics clinic between 26 and 37 wk of gestation and examined by Doppler ultrasound. Blood velocity waveforms were recorded for each umbilical artery at three locations along the umbilical cord. With the use of a computational procedure, a pair of forward and reverse propagating waves was identified to explain the variation in observed Doppler ultrasound waveforms along the cord. Among the data sets that met data quality requirements, waveforms in 93 of the 130 arteries examined agreed with the wave reflection model to within 1.5% and showed reflections ranging in magnitude from 3 to 52% of the forward wave amplitude. Strong reflections were associated with large differences in pulsatility between the fetal and placental ends of the cord. As reflections arise from transitions in the biomechanical properties of blood vessels, these observations provide a plausible mechanism for the link between abnormal waveforms and clinically significant placental pathology and could lead to more precise screening methods for detecting pregnancies complicated by placental disease. NEW & NOTEWORTHY The pulsatile pattern of blood motion measured by Doppler ultrasound within the umbilical artery is known to contain useful diagnostic information and is widely used to monitor pregnancies at risk of fetal growth restriction. We demonstrate based on a study of 95 pregnant women that the shape of these umbilical artery waveforms is explained by the presence of a reflected pressure wave traveling counter to the direction of blood flow.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".