MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385516407 · doi:10.1002/mp.16651

Development of a morphologically realistic mouse phantom for pre‐clinical photoacoustic imaging

2023· article· en· W4385516407 on OpenAlexaff
Valeria Grasso, Jason L. Raymond, Regine Willumeit‐Römer, James Joseph, Jithin Jose

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic Imaging
Canadian institutionsFujiFilm VisualSonics (Canada)
FundersAcademy of Medical Sciences
KeywordsImaging phantomBiomedical engineeringPhotoacoustic imaging in biomedicineMedical imagingMaterials scienceComputer scienceMedical physicsNuclear medicineMedicineOpticsArtificial intelligencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Characterizations based on anatomically realistic phantoms are highly effective to perform accurate technical validation of imaging systems. Specifically for photoacoustic imaging (PAI), although a variety of phantom models with simplified geometries are reported, an unmet need still exists to establish morphologically realistic heterogeneous pre-clinical phantoms. So the development of a mouse-mimicking phantom can reduce the use of animals for the validation and standardization studies of pre-clinical PAI systems and thus eventually translate the PAI technology to clinical research. PURPOSE: Here we designed, developed, and fabricated a stable phantom that mimics the detailed morphology of a mouse, to be used as a realistic tool for PAI. METHODS: The mouse phantom, has been designed by using a combination of image modeling and 3D-printing techniques. As a tissue-mimicking material, we have used copolymer-in-oil-based material that was recently proposed by the International Photoacoustic Standardization Consortium (IPASC). In particular, the anatomically realistic phantom has been modeled by using the real atlas of a mouse as a reference. The mouse phantom includes a 3D-printed skeleton and the main abdominal organs such as the liver, spleen, and kidneys obtained by using doped copolymer-in-oil material with 3D-printed molds. In addition, the acoustic and optical properties of the tissue-mimicking material and the long-term stability have been broadly characterized. RESULTS: Furthermore, our studies showed that the phantom is durable and stable for more than 200 days, under normal storage and repeated use. Fabrication protocol is easy to reproduce. As a result, the proposed morphologically realistic mouse phantom offers durability, material compatibility, and an unprecedented realistic resemblance to the actual rodents' anatomy in PAI. CONCLUSION: This durable morphologically realistic mouse phantom would minimize the animal experiments in compliance with the 3R principle of Replacement, Reduction, and Refinement. To our knowledge, this is the first time an anatomically realistic heterogeneous mouse phantom has been proposed for PAI in pre-clinical animal imaging and tested its durability over 200 days.

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)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.285 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic ImagingFrench-language works237,207