MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415050882 · doi:10.1093/bjr/tqaf249

Characterizing chronic obstructive pulmonary disease using quantitative MRI biomarkers

2025· article· en· W4415050882 on OpenAlexafffund
Daniel Genkin, Kalysta Makimoto, Miranda Kirby

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Radiology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAtomic and Subatomic Physics Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMagnetic resonance imagingLungFunctional imagingAirwayPulmonary diseaseVentilation (architecture)DiseaseComputed tomography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a heterogeneous lung disease that occurs due to structural changes to the parenchyma, airways and pulmonary vasculature, and consequent functional impairments to ventilation and perfusion. Although computed tomography (CT) imaging is the standard for assessing structural lung changes in COPD, it requires ionizing radiation and is unable to provide functional information without contrast agents. Conversely, there have been numerous developments for MRI of the lungs in the last several decades, allowing for the quantification of structural and functional abnormalities without ionizing radiation. Various quantitative MR (qMR) imaging biomarkers have been developed that describe parenchymal and airway structure as well as ventilation and perfusion within the lungs. These qMR imaging biomarkers have been investigated in individuals with COPD, reporting both cross-sectional and longitudinal associations with important outcomes. Therefore, the aim of this article is to briefly review some commonly used MRI techniques that have been investigated for lung imaging and discuss commonly implemented qMR imaging biomarkers and their application in COPD. Additionally, this review will focus on gaps in the literature that should be addressed to allow for future widespread implementation of qMR imaging biomarkers in COPD-related research.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.605
Threshold uncertainty score0.551

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.285 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of RadiologySame topicAtomic and Subatomic Physics ResearchFrench-language works237,207