MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2987409219 · doi:10.1121/1.5136734

Quantitative ultrasound in obstetrics and perinatal care

2019· article· en· W2987409219 on OpenAlexaff
Iván M. Rosado-Méndez, Abel Torres, Laura Castañeda‐Martinez, Francisco Torres-Arvizu, Lindsey Carlson, Mark L. Palmeri, James A. Zagzebski, Hassan Rivaz, Chrysanthy Ikonomidou, Helen Feltovich, Timothy J. Hall

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound Imaging and Elastography
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineUltrasoundCervixObstetricsObstetrics and gynaecologyPregnancyRadiologyInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This talk will present recent results from our multi-institutional effort to advance the application of Quantitative Ultrasound in obstetrics and in perinatal care. In the field of obstetrics, we are investigating the use of shear wave elasticity imaging (SWEI) to predict the risk of preterm birth based on assessing the viscoelastic properties of the uterine cervix. Longitudinal studies in non-human primates (NHP) and humans showed a similar rate of decrease of the shear wave speed, SWS (1.6% and 1.5%/% gestational age, respectively), validating the animal model and indicating the value of SWS change as a biomarker for cervical softening. We are currently optimizing the analysis of shear wave dispersion to assess changes in viscosity. In the field of perinatal care, results from a pilot study in NHP neonates suggest that the effective size of diffuse scatterers can be used as a biomarker for thalamic apoptosis induced by long exposures to anesthesia. We are currently investigating the use of coherent scattering features to increase the sensitivity and specificity to neuroapoptosis and to improve attenuation and backscatter coefficient estimations in complex tissues such as the cervix and the neonate brain. [Acknowledgments: All protocols have been IRB- and/or IACUC-approved, and are HIPAA compliant. Equipment loan and technical support from Siemens Healthcare. Funded by: NIH Grant Nos. T32CA009206, F31HD082911, R01HD072077, UL1TR000427, P51OD011106, and R01HD083001; NSERC Grant No. RGPIN-2015-04136; and UNAM-PAPIIT IA104518 and IN107916.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.106

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicUltrasound Imaging and ElastographyFrench-language works237,207