<i>In vivo</i> validation of an <i>in situ</i> calibration bead as a reference for backscatter coefficient calculation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objectives The study aims to assess the capability of Quantitative Ul-trasound (QUS) based on the backscatter coefficient (BSC) for classifying disease states, such as breast cancer response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and quantifying fatty liver disease. We evaluate the effectiveness of an in situ titanium (Ti) bead as a reference target in calibrating the system and mitigating attenuation and transmission loss effects on BSC estimation. Methods Traditional BSC estimation methods require external references for calibration, which do not account for ultrasound attenuation or transmis-sion losses through tissues. To address this issue, we use an in situ titanium (Ti) bead as a reference target, because it can be used to calibrate the system and mitigate the attenuation and transmission loss effects on estimation of the BSC. The capabilities of the in situ calibration approach were assessed by quantifying consistency of BSC estimates from rabbit mammary tumors (N = 21). Specifically, mammary tumors were grown in rabbits and when a tumor reached 1 cm or greater in size, a 2-mm Ti bead was implanted into the tumor as a radiological marker and a calibration source for ultrasound. Three days later, the tumors were scanned with a L-14/5 38 array transducer connected to a SonixOne scanner with and without a slab of pork belly placed on top of the tumors. The pork belly acted as an additional source of attenu-ation and transmission loss. QUS parameters, specifically effective scatterer diameter (ESD) and effective acoustic concentration (EAC), were calculated using calibration spectra from both an external reference phantom and the Ti bead. Results For ESD estimation, the 95% confidence interval between measure-ments with and without the pork belly layer was (6.0,27.4) using the in situ bead and (114, 135.1) with the external reference phantom. For EAC esti-mation, the 95% confidence interval were (−8.1, 0.5) for the bead and (−41.5, −32.2) for the phantom. These results indicate that the in situ bead method shows reduced bias in QUS estimates due to intervening tissue losses. Conclusions The use of an in situ Ti bead as a radiological marker not only serves its traditional role but also effectively acts as a calibration target for QUS methods. This approach accounts for attenuation and transmission losses in tissue, resulting in more accurate QUS estimates and offering a promising method for enhanced disease state classification in clinical settings.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".