Rapid quantitative susceptibility mapping of intracerebral hemorrhage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM) offers a means to track iron evolution in hemorrhage. However, standard QSM sequences have long acquisition times and are prone to motion artifact in hemorrhagic patients. PURPOSE: To minimize motion artifact and acquisition time by performing rapid QSM in intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) using single-shot echo planar imaging (EPI). STUDY TYPE: Prospective method evaluation. POPULATION/SUBJECTS: Forty-five hemorrhages were analyzed from 35 MRI exams obtained between February 2016 and March 2019 from 27 patients (14 male / 13 female, age: 71 ± 12 years) with confirmed primary ICH. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: 3T; susceptibility-weighted imaging (SWI) with 4.54-minute acquisition and 2D single-shot gradient EPI with 0.45-minute acquisition. ASSESSMENT: Susceptibility maps were constructed from both methods. Measurement of ICH area and mean magnetic susceptibility were made manually by three independent observers. Motion artifacts were quantified using the magnitude signal ratio of artifact-to-brain tissue to classify into three categories: mild or no artifact, moderate artifact, or severe artifact. The cutoff for each category was determined by four observers. STATISTICAL TESTS: Pearson's correlation coefficient and paired t-test using α = 0.05 were used to compare results. Inter- and intraclass correlation was used to assess observer variability. RESULTS: ≥ 0.93) for all observers. The artifact-to-tissue ratio was significantly higher (P < 0.01) for SWI vs. EPI, and the standard deviation for the SWI method (SD = 0.05) was much larger than EPI (SD = 0.01). All observers' measurements showed high agreement. DATA CONCLUSION: Single-shot EPI-QSM enabled rapid measurement of ICH area and mean magnetic susceptibility, with reduced motion as compared with more standard SWI. EPI-QSM requires minimal additional acquisition time and could be incorporated into iron tracking studies in ICH. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2 Technical Efficacy Stage: 1 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2020;51:712-718.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".