MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W39060945

Radionuclide angiography with a dedicated cardiac SPECT camera

2011· article· en· W39060945 on OpenAlexaff
Gil Kovalski, Terrence D. Ruddy

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEjection fractionGamma cameraNuclear medicineMedicineGated SPECTPertechnetateArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceComputer visionTechnetiumCardiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1164 Objectives Dedicated cardiac SPECT cameras have been developed that offer greatly improved sensitivity over traditional systems. Interest in these systems has been focused on myocardial perfusion imaging, however, measurement of ventricular function with gated blood-pool imaging remains an important test. Our objective is to compare ejection fraction (EF) measured on a dedicated cardiac camera to that measured on a traditional system. Methods Forty-three patients undergoing a gated blood-pool exam at our center were recruited to the study. All patients were imaged according to our standard clinical protocol. Red blood cells were labeled with 1100 MBq of pertechnetate using a modified in vivo approach. 24-frame gated planar images were obtained in an left-anterior-oblique (LAO) orientation for 10 min on a standard gamma camera (Cardial, GE Healthcare). Immediately following the standard acquisition, patients were positioned in the Discovery NM 530c (GE Healthcare) dedicated cardiac SPECT camera. 24-frame ECG-gated data were obtained for 8 min. The gated image volumes were iteratively reconstructed on a Xeleris 2.0 workstation and then transferred offline. In-house software was used to reproject the images into a 24-frame gated planar format at an angle approximately the same as that used for the clinical planar study. Both gated planar data sets were then evaluated using the FUGA semi-automated gated blood-pool analysis program on a Hermes workstation to determine the ejection fraction. Results Two studies were discarded due to poor quality of either the traditional images (n=1) or the dedicated cardiac images (n=2). The difference in ejection fraction averaged 0.3% with a standard deviation of 5%. The correlation between the two EF measurements was excellent (r2 =0.87). The linear regression of the data had a slope of 1.0 and an intercept of 0.4%. Conclusions Reprojection of 24-frame gated blood-pool SPECT images is an effective means of obtaining an EF from a dedicated cardiac SPECT camera using standard 2D-planar analysis tools

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications→French-language works237,207→