MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407568381 · doi:10.1117/12.3046115

Spatial and volumetric validation of 3D ultrasound musculoskeletal system

2025· article· en· W4407568381 on OpenAlexaff
Clara Duquette-Evans, Megan Hutter, Randa Mudathir, Aaron Fenster, Emily Lalone

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFoot and Ankle Surgery
Canadian institutionsRobarts Clinical Trials
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceUltrasoundBiomedical engineeringComputer visionMedicineRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Synovial inflammation in the joint has previously been found to be positively correlated to pain experienced by patients suffering from osteoarthritis (OA);1 however, its role mediating cartilage degradation has increasingly become of interest. Monitoring inflammatory and structural changes in joints affected by OA is an important strategy to strengthen our understanding of disease progression, as well as to identify varying phenotypic presentations of the disease. Our lab has developed a 3D US musculoskeletal imaging system for quantitative assessment of synovial inflammation in OA. The system is equipped with a mechatronic counterbalanced arm that supports a 3D US-based linear motorized scanner and allows tracking of the 3D US scanner. This capability provides a method to fuse multiple acquired 3D US images into a larger view of the anatomy, which is needed to image the knee joint. The goal of this work was to evaluate (1) the accuracy and precision of the mechatronic arm’s tracking and (2) the accuracy of the volumetric measurements in the fused 3D US images. In the first experiment, we imaged an agar-based phantom with 5 embedded small spherical inclusions from varying positions. Using these tracked images, we measured the coordinates of the inclusions and calculated the target registration error (TRE) from the mean position of each inclusion. In the second experiment, 3D US images were acquired of an agar phantom containing a semi-cylindrical inclusion, which were fused. The inclusion was then manually segmented and the error between the segmented and actual volumes was determined. TREs for each coordinate component of the spherical inclusions were small, indicating accurate spatial tracking by the system. The average error of the segmented semi-cylindrical inclusion was 4.76%, demonstrating accurate fusion. Our results shows that the system is a promising tool for quantitative monitoring of soft-tissue changes in joints afflicted with musculoskeletal pathologies.

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)0.009
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.247 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFoot and Ankle SurgeryFrench-language works237,207