Validation of R2* magnetic resonance imaging for quantifying secondary iron overload in pediatric patients
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Non-invasive assessment of iron deposition is the standard of care for guiding chelation therapy in patients with iron overload. Several magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based techniques have been developed. This study compares the MRI-based R2* method with the standard R2-based method for quantifying iron levels in the liver and heart in children and young adults with secondary iron overload. METHODS: A single-center prospective study was conducted over 2.5 years involving 14 patients aged 4-22 years with secondary iron overload. These patients underwent 40 MRI scans using both R2 and R2* methods at same time. A total of 36 scans were analyzed, comparing the two methods using linear regression analysis and Bland-Altman plots. RESULTS: = 0.93483). CONCLUSION: The R2* method for assessing iron deposition in the liver and cardiac septum is comparable to the R2-based method and is suitable for clinical use. However, due to slight differences in measurements between the two techniques, it is advisable to consistently use one method for monitoring treatment in each patient. Further research is needed to refine the calibration equations. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: This study highlights the MRI-based R2* method as a reliable, non-invasive, and cost-effective alternative to the R2-based method for monitoring iron overload in pediatric patients, with no additional costs for institutions or third parties.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it