Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping of Venous Vessels in Neonates with Perinatal Asphyxia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Cerebral venous oxygen saturation can be used as an indirect measure of brain health, yet it often requires either an invasive procedure or a noninvasive technique with poor sensitivity. We aimed to test whether cerebral venous oxygen saturation could be measured using quantitative susceptibility mapping, an MR imaging technique, in 3 distinct groups: healthy term neonates, injured term neonates, and preterm neonates. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We acquired multiecho gradient-echo MR imaging data in 16 neonates with perinatal asphyxia and moderate or severe hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy (8 term age: average, 40.0 [SD, 0.8] weeks’ gestational age; 8 preterm, 33.5 [SD, 2.0] weeks’ gestational age) and in 8 healthy term-age controls (39.3 [SD, 0.6] weeks, for a total of n = 24. Data were postprocessed as quantitative susceptibility mapping images, and magnetic susceptibility was measured in cerebral veins by thesholding out 99.95% of lower magnetic susceptibility values. RESULTS: The mean magnetic susceptibility value of the cerebral veins was found to be 0.36 (SD, 0.04) ppm in healthy term neonates, 0.36 (SD, 0.06) ppm in term injured neonates, and 0.29 (SD, 0.04) ppm in preterm injured neonates. Correspondingly, the derived cerebral venous oxygen saturation values were 73.6% (SD, 2.8%), 71.5% (SD, 7.4%), and 72.2% (SD, 5.9%). There was no statistically significant difference in cerebral venous oxygen saturation among the 3 groups (P = .751). CONCLUSIONS: Quantitative susceptibility mapping–derived oxygen saturation values in preterm and term neonates agreed well with values in past literature. Cerebral venous oxygen saturation in preterm and term neonates with hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy, however, was not found to be significantly different between neonates or healthy controls.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".