MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

T2* Placental Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Preterm Preeclampsia: An Observational Cohort Study.

2020· article· en· W3020359021 on OpenAlexaff
Alison Ho, Jana Hutter, Laurence H. Jackson, Paul T. Seed, Laura McCabe, Mudher Al‐Adnani, Andreas Marnerides, Simi George, Lisa Story, Joseph V. Hajnal, Mary Rutherford, Lucy C. Chappell

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchWellcome Trust
KeywordsPreeclampsiaGestationMedicineInterquartile rangeGestational agePregnancyMagnetic resonance imagingPlacentaObstetricsIntervillous spaceInternal medicineFetusRadiologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

test, t=7.49) correlating with a reduction in maternal PlGF (placental growth factor) concentrations (Spearman rank correlation coefficient 0.76) and increased lacunarity values (t=3.26). Median mean T2* reduced from 67 ms (IQR, 54-73) at 26.0 to 29.8 weeks' gestation to 38 ms (IQR, 28-40) at 34.0 to 37.9 weeks' gestation in the control group. In women with preeclampsia, median T2* was 23 ms (IQR, 20-23) at 26.0 to 29.8 weeks' gestation and remained low (22 ms [IQR, 20-26] at 34.0-37.8 weeks' gestation). Histological features of maternal vascular malperfusion were only found in placentae from women with preeclampsia. Placental volume did not differ between the control group and women with preeclampsia. Placental magnetic resonance imaging allows both objective quantification of placental function in vivo and elucidation of the complex mechanisms underlying preeclampsia development.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.062
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations76
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studiesFrench-language works237,207