Interobserver and Intraobserver Reliability of Hepatic Shear Wave Elastography and the Influence of Fasted Versus Nonfasted States in Healthy Volunteers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this study was to assess the effect of fasting versus ingestion of food and water on hepatic measurements by shear wave elastography (SWE) in healthy participants. The secondary objective was to assess inter- and intra-reader reliability of hepatic elastography in healthy participants. METHODS: Twenty healthy participants were enrolled in this prospective study and underwent quantitative SWE under fasting conditions and after the ingestion of water and food and water. Two blinded sonographers each independently performed a total of 6 sessions of hepatic SWE in each participant. Sessions 1 to 3 were performed on day 0 and sessions 4 to 6 on day 7. Statistical tests used included the Wilcoxon signed ranks test, the intraclass correlation coefficient, and Bland-Altman plots. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in hepatic SWE measurements after the ingestion of water versus the fasting state. Statistical significance was assessed as P < 0.05. The postprandial status had a statistically significant effect on hepatic SWE measurements at 1 hour (P = .04) but not at 3 hours (P = .08). By the intraclass correlation coefficient, there was poor-to-moderate inter-reader agreement and minimal-to-moderate intra-reader agreement. The median inter-reader difference in SWE measurements ranged from 0.66 to 0.96 kPa. The median intra-reader difference ranged from 0.43 to 0.55 kPa. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that the ingestion of water has no effect on hepatic SWE measurements in healthy participants. The postprandial state had a significant effect on SWE measurements at 1 hour after ingestion but not at 3 hours. The inter-reader and intra-reader agreements were variable and moderate at best.
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 | 0.016 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".