Characterizing the Myoarchitecture of the Supraspinatus and Infraspinatus Muscles With <scp>MRI</scp> Using Diffusion Tensor Imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background The societal cost of shoulder disabilities in our aging society keeps rising. Providing biomarkers of early changes in the microstructure of rotator cuff (RC) muscles might improve surgical planning. Elevation angle (E1A) and pennation angle (PA) assessed by ultrasound change with RC tears. Furthermore, ultrasounds lack repeatability. Purpose To propose a repeatable framework to quantify the myocyte angulation in RC muscles. Study Type Prospective. Subjects Six asymptomatic healthy volunteers (1 female aged 30 years; 5 males, mean age 35 years, range 25–49 years), who underwent three repositioned scanning sessions (10 minutes apart) of the right infraspinatus muscle (ISPM) and supraspinatus muscle (SSPM). Field Strength/Sequence 3‐T, T1‐weighted and diffusion tensor imaging (DTI; 12 gradient encoding directions, b‐values of 500 and 800 s/mm2). Assessment Each voxel was binned in percentage of depth defined by the shortest distance in the antero‐posterior direction (manual delineation), i.e. the radial axis. A second order polynomial fit for PA across the muscle depth was used, while E1A described a sigmoid across depth: . Statistical Tests Repeatability was assessed with the nonparametric Wilcoxon's rank‐sum test for paired comparisons across repeated scans in each volunteer for each anatomical muscle region and across repeated measures of the radial axis. A P‐value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results In the ISPM, E1A was constantly negative, became helicoidal, then mainly positive across the antero‐posterior depth, respective at the caudal, central and cranial regions. In the SSPM, posterior myocytes ran more parallel to the intramuscular tendon (), while anterior myocytes inserted with a pennation angle (). E1A and PA were repeatable in each volunteer (error < 10%). Intra‐repeatability of the radial axis was achieved (error < 5%). Data Conclusion ElA and PA in the proposed framework of the ISPM and SSPM are repeatable with DTI. Variations of myocyte angulation in the ISPM and SSPM can be quantified across volunteers. Evidence Level 2 Technical Efficacy Stage 2
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".