MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388018006 · doi:10.3390/children10111759

Practical Stepwise Approach to Performing Neonatal Brain MR Imaging in the Research Setting

2023· article· en· W4388018006 on OpenAlexafffund
Regan King, Selma Low, Roger Wood, Joanne Houghton, Lara M. Leijser

Bibliographic record

VenueChildren · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal and fetal brain pathology
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalAlberta Health ServicesUniversity of Calgary
FundersCalgary Health FoundationAlberta Children's Hospital Research InstituteAlberta Children's Hospital Foundation
KeywordsMagnetic resonance imagingMedicineSedationMedical physicsImage qualityArtificial intelligenceRadiologyComputer scienceSurgeryImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a non-invasive imaging technique that is commonly used for the visualization of newborn infant brains, both for clinical and research purposes. One of the main challenges with scanning newborn infants, particularly when scanning without sedation in a research setting, is movement. Infant movement can affect MR image quality and therewith reliable image assessment and advanced image analysis. Applying a systematic, stepwise approach to MR scanning during the neonatal period, including the use of the feed-and-bundle technique, is effective in reducing infant motion and ensuring high-quality images. We provide recommendations for one such systematic approach, including the step-by-step preparation and infant immobilization, and highlight safety precautions to minimize any potential risks. The recommendations are primarily focused on scanning newborn infants for research purposes but may be used successfully for clinical purposes as well, granted the infant is medically stable. Using the stepwise approach in our local research setting, our success rate of acquiring high-quality, analyzable infant brain MR images during the neonatal period is as high as 91%.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.011

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChildrenSame topicNeonatal and fetal brain pathologyFrench-language works237,207