Validation of cardiac diffusion tensor imaging sequences: A multicentre test–retest phantom study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cardiac diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) is an emerging technique for the in vivo characterisation of myocardial microstructure, and there is a growing need for its validation and standardisation. We sought to establish the accuracy, precision, repeatability and reproducibility of state‐of‐the‐art pulse sequences for cardiac DTI among 10 centres internationally. Phantoms comprising 0%–20% polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP) were scanned with DTI using a product pulsed gradient spin echo (PGSE; N = 10 sites) sequence, and a custom motion‐compensated spin echo (SE; N = 5) or stimulated echo acquisition mode (STEAM; N = 5) sequence suitable for cardiac DTI in vivo. A second identical scan was performed 1–9 days later, and the data were analysed centrally. The average mean diffusivities (MDs) in 0% PVP were (1.124, 1.130, 1.113) x 10 −3 mm 2 /s for PGSE, SE and STEAM, respectively, and accurate to within 1.5% of reference data from the literature. The coefficients of variation in MDs across sites were 2.6%, 3.1% and 2.1% for PGSE, SE and STEAM, respectively, and were similar to previous studies using only PGSE. Reproducibility in MD was excellent, with mean differences in PGSE, SE and STEAM of (0.3 ± 2.3, 0.24 ± 0.95, 0.52 ± 0.58) x 10 −5 mm 2 /s (mean ± 1.96 SD). We show that custom sequences for cardiac DTI provide accurate, precise, repeatable and reproducible measurements. Further work in anisotropic and/or deforming phantoms is warranted.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".