T2*-Weighted Imaging Performance in the Detection of Deep Endometriosis among Readers with Different Experience: Comparison with Conventional MRI Sequences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is an effective technique for the diagnosis and preoperative staging of deep infiltrative endometriosis (DIE). The usefulness of MRI sequences susceptible to chronic blood degradation products, such as T2*-weighted imaging, remains uncertain. The present study aims to evaluate the diagnostic performance of these sequences in addition to the conventional protocol for DIE assessment. Forty-four MRI examinations performed for clinical and/or ultrasound DIE suspicion were evaluated by three readers with variable experience in female imaging. The inter-observer agreement between the reader who analysed only the conventional protocol and the one who also considered T2*-weighted sequences was excellent. The less experienced reader diagnosed a significantly higher number of endometriosis foci on the T2*-weighted sequences compared with the most experienced observer. T2*-weighted sequences do not seem to provide significant added value in the evaluation of DIE, especially in less experienced readers. Furthermore, artifacts caused by undesirable sources of magnetic inhomogeneity may lead to overdiagnosis.
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".