MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394693674 · doi:10.1016/j.jcmg.2024.01.009

Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Reference Ranges From the Healthy Hearts Consortium

2024· article· en· W4394693674 on OpenAlexaff
Zahra Raisi‐Estabragh, Liliána Szabó, Celeste McCracken, Robin Bülow, Giovanni Donato Aquaro, Florian André, Thu‐Thao Le, Dominika Suchá, Dorina-Gabriela Condurache, Ahmed Salih, Sucharitha Chadalavada, Nay Aung, Aaron M. Lee, Nicholas C. Harvey, Tim Leiner, Calvin Chin, Matthias G. Friedrich, Andrea Barison, Marcus Dörr, Steffen E. Petersen

Bibliographic record

VenueJACC. Cardiovascular imaging · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersMedical Research CouncilZonMwBritish Heart FoundationBarts Charity
KeywordsCardiac magnetic resonanceMagnetic resonance imagingNuclear magnetic resonanceCardiologyMedicineInternal medicinePhysicsRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The absence of population-stratified cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) reference ranges from large cohorts is a major shortcoming for clinical care. OBJECTIVES: This paper provides age-, sex-, and ethnicity-specific CMR reference ranges for atrial and ventricular metrics from the Healthy Hearts Consortium, an international collaborative comprising 9,088 CMR studies from verified healthy individuals, covering the complete adult age spectrum across both sexes, and with the highest ethnic diversity reported to date. METHODS: CMR studies were analyzed using certified software with batch processing capability (cvi42, version 5.14 prototype, Circle Cardiovascular Imaging) by 2 expert readers. Three segmentation methods (smooth, papillary, anatomic) were used to contour the endocardial and epicardial borders of the ventricles and atria from long- and short-axis cine series. Clinically established ventricular and atrial metrics were extracted and stratified by age, sex, and ethnicity. Variations by segmentation method, scanner vendor, and magnet strength were examined. Reference ranges are reported as 95% prediction intervals. RESULTS: The sample included 4,452 (49.0%) men and 4,636 (51.0%) women with average age of 61.1 ± 12.9 years (range: 18-83 years). Among these, 7,424 (81.7%) were from White, 510 (5.6%) South Asian, 478 (5.3%) mixed/other, 341 (3.7%) Black, and 335 (3.7%) Chinese ethnicities. Images were acquired using 1.5-T (n = 8,779; 96.6%) and 3.0-T (n = 309; 3.4%) scanners from Siemens (n = 8,299; 91.3%), Philips (n = 498; 5.5%), and GE (n = 291, 3.2%). CONCLUSIONS: This work represents a resource with healthy CMR-derived volumetric reference ranges ready for clinical implementation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.950
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations40
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJACC. Cardiovascular imagingSame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207