Phase analysis of gated PET in the evaluation of mechanical ventricular synchrony: A narrative overview
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Noninvasive imaging modalities offer the possibility to dynamically evaluate cardiac motion during the cardiac cycle by means of ECG-gated acquisitions. Such motion characterization along with orientation, segmentation preprocessing, and ultimately, phase analysis, can provide quantitative estimates of ventricular mechanical synchrony. Current evidence on the role of mechanical synchrony evaluation is mainly available for echocardiography and gated single-photon emission computed tomography, but less is known about the utilization of gated positron emission tomography (PET). Although data available are sparse, there is indication that mechanical synchrony evaluation can be of diagnostic and prognostic values in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease-related myocardial ischemia, prediction of response to cardiac resynchronization therapy, and estimation of risk for adverse cardiac events in patients' heart failure. As such, the evaluation of mechanical ventricular synchrony through phase analysis of gated acquisitions represents a value addition to modern cardiac PET imaging modality, which warrants further research and development in the evaluation of patients with cardiovascular disease.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| 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".