MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1534993539 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0127939

Use of Brain MRI Atlases to Determine Boundaries of Age-Related Pathology: The Importance of Statistical Method

2015· article· en· W1534993539 on OpenAlexfundno aff
David Alexander Dickie, Dominic Job, Susan D. Shenkin, Joanna M. Wardlaw

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthEconomic and Social Research CouncilUniversity of California, San DiegoCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of California, Los AngelesGenentechNational Institutes of HealthIXICOServierNational Institute on AgingCentre for Cognitive Ageing and Cognitive EpidemiologyEisaiAlzheimer's AssociationAmorfix Life SciencesScottish Funding CouncilAlzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging InitiativeUniversity of EdinburghNorthern California Institute for Research and EducationPfizerBiogenBioClinicaNational Center for Research ResourcesF. Hoffmann-La RocheMedpaceAstraZenecaEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers SquibbEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilBayer HealthCareMedical Research CouncilMeso Scale DiagnosticsNovartis Pharmaceuticals CorporationBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilWellcome TrustSynarc
KeywordsStatistical parametric mappingVoxelNonparametric statisticsAtlas (anatomy)Magnetic resonance imagingPercentileMedicineParametric statisticsBrain atlasStandard deviationNeuroimagingNuclear medicinePsychologyMathematicsRadiologyStatisticsNeuroscienceAnatomyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Neurodegenerative disease diagnoses may be supported by the comparison of an individual patient's brain magnetic resonance image (MRI) with a voxel-based atlas of normal brain MRI. Most current brain MRI atlases are of young to middle-aged adults and parametric, e.g., mean ± standard deviation (SD); these atlases require data to be Gaussian. Brain MRI data, e.g., grey matter (GM) proportion images, from normal older subjects are apparently not Gaussian. We created a nonparametric and a parametric atlas of the normal limits of GM proportions in older subjects and compared their classifications of GM proportions in Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients. METHODS: Using publicly available brain MRI from 138 normal subjects and 138 subjects diagnosed with AD (all 55-90 years), we created: a mean ± SD atlas to estimate parametrically the percentile ranks and limits of normal ageing GM; and, separately, a nonparametric, rank order-based GM atlas from the same normal ageing subjects. GM images from AD patients were then classified with respect to each atlas to determine the effect statistical distributions had on classifications of proportions of GM in AD patients. RESULTS: The parametric atlas often defined the lower normal limit of the proportion of GM to be negative (which does not make sense physiologically as the lowest possible proportion is zero). Because of this, for approximately half of the AD subjects, 25-45% of voxels were classified as normal when compared to the parametric atlas; but were classified as abnormal when compared to the nonparametric atlas. These voxels were mainly concentrated in the frontal and occipital lobes. DISCUSSION: To our knowledge, we have presented the first nonparametric brain MRI atlas. In conditions where there is increasing variability in brain structure, such as in old age, nonparametric brain MRI atlases may represent the limits of normal brain structure more accurately than parametric approaches. Therefore, we conclude that the statistical method used for construction of brain MRI atlases should be selected taking into account the population and aim under study. Parametric methods are generally robust for defining central tendencies, e.g., means, of brain structure. Nonparametric methods are advisable when studying the limits of brain structure in ageing and neurodegenerative disease.

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)0.096
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.189
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.904
Threshold uncertainty score0.510

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0960.189
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.244 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
DomainMethods
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

Citations23
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→