MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1537293043 · doi:10.1002/hbm.22423

In vivo normative atlas of the hippocampal subfields using multi‐echo susceptibility imaging at 7 Tesla

2013· article· en· W1537293043 on OpenAlexafffund
Maged Goubran, David A. Rudko, Brendan Santyr, Joe Gati, Trevor Szekeres, Terry M. Peters, Ali R. Khan

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Brain Mapping · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsHippocampal formationQuantitative susceptibility mappingVoxelAtlas (anatomy)Magnetic resonance imagingNuclear magnetic resonancePattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceNuclear medicineComputer scienceNeurosciencePhysicsPsychologyMedicineAnatomyRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To generate a high-resolution atlas of the hippocampal subfields using images acquired from 7 T, multi-echo, gradient-echo MRI for the evaluation of epilepsy and neurodegenerative disorders as well as investigating R2* (apparent transverse relaxation rate) and quantitative volume magnetic susceptibility (QS) of the subfields. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Healthy control subjects (n=17) were scanned at 7 T using a multi-echo gradient-echo sequence and susceptibility-weighted magnitude images, R2* and QS maps were reconstructed. We defined a hippocampal subfield labeling protocol for the magnitude image produced from the average of all echoes and assessed reproducibility through volume and shape metrics. A group-wise diffeomorphic registration procedure was used to generate an average atlas of the subfields for the whole subject cohort. The quantitative MRI maps and subfield labels were then warped to the average atlas space and used to measure mean values of R2* and QS characterizing each subfield. PRINCIPAL OBSERVATIONS: We were able to reliably label hippocampal subfields on the multi-echo susceptibility images. The group-averaged atlas accurately aligns these structures to produce a high-resolution depiction of the subfields, allowing assessment of both quantitative susceptibility and R2* across subjects. Our analysis of variance demonstrates that there are more apparent differences between the subfields on these quantitative maps than the normalized magnitude images. CONCLUSION: We constructed a high-resolution atlas of the hippocampal subfields for use in voxel-based studies and demonstrated in vivo quantification of susceptibility and R2* in the subfields. This work is the first in vivo quantification of susceptibility values within the hippocampal subfields at 7 T.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.784
Threshold uncertainty score0.446

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 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

Citations37
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman Brain MappingSame topicAdvanced MRI Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207