MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4238453333 · doi:10.1109/nssmic.2002.1239684

Cardiac PET imaging of blood flow, metabolism and function in normal and infarcted rats

2004· article· en· W4238453333 on OpenAlexaffabout
Roger Lecomte, E. Croteau, M.-E. Gauthier, M. Archambault, A. Aliaga, J. Rousseau, J. Cadorette, F. Benard, M. Bentourkia

Bibliographic record

Venue2002 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCardiac PETBlood flowPositron emission tomographyCardiac function curveEx vivoMedicineCardiac imagingPreclinical imagingIn vivoBiomedical engineeringNuclear medicineCardiologyHeart failureBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rat heart is an excellent model for the investigation of cardiac physiology and metabolism. It has been used extensively for ex vivo studies of the normal heart as well as for the study of various heart diseases. With the advent of dedicated high-resolution small animal PET scanners, it is now possible to transpose many of the cardiac investigations routinely used in humans to the rat. These include the in vivo measurement of myocardial blood flow, metabolism, and function. Because these techniques are non-invasive, the same animal can be imaged repetitively, thus allowing for follow-up studies of disease progression and for the monitoring of new therapeutic methods. In this work, we report on cardiac studies performed in normal and diseased rats using the Sherbrooke avalanche photodiode PET scanner, a small animal PET imaging device achieving 14 /spl mu/l volumetric spatial resolution with excellent image signal-to-noise ratio. The system also features flexible list-mode data acquisition, which allows dynamic studies to be resampled as desired for kinetic modeling. Examples of the application of cardiac PET imaging to the follow-up of infarcted rats treated with experimental revascularisation therapy will be presented.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.752
Threshold uncertainty score0.468

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2002 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference RecordSame topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207