MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1554105363 · doi:10.1161/str.46.suppl_1.wmp119

Abstract W MP119: Sensitivity and Reliability of MRI SWI Compared With GRE Sequences for Detecting Microbleeds in a Community Population

2015· article· en· W1554105363 on OpenAlexaff
Saima Batool, Shivanand Patil, Michael D. Noseworthy, Martin O’Donnell, Mukul Sharma, Shofiqul Islam, Koon Teo, Sandra E. Black, M. Louis Lauzon, Cheryl R. McCreary, Richard Frayne, Jane DeJesus, Sumathy Rangarajan, Salim Yusuf, Eric E. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntracerebral and Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Research
Canadian institutionsHamilton Health SciencesUniversity of TorontoMcMaster UniversityMcMaster Children's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSusceptibility weighted imagingKappaPopulationNuclear medicineProspective cohort studyGradient echoMagnetic resonance imagingRadiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: MRI susceptibility-weighted imaging (SWI) provides better contrast and is typically done at higher spatial resolution than MRI T2*-weighted gradient-recalled echo (GRE), increasing the sensitivity for cerebral microbleed (CMB) detection. However, few studies have implemented SWI and GRE in the same scan session, and there is uncertainty regarding whether findings on SWI are comparable to findings on GRE. We compared the sensitivity and reliability of SWI vs. GRE sequences for detecting CMBs in a community population. Methods: Using a standardized case report form, two radiologists independently identified CMBs on SWI and GRE in 247 participants age 40 to 75 in the community-based Prospective Urban Rural (PURE) MIND substudy. MRI was performed on the same GE 3T MRI scanner using typical clinical sequence parameters. SWI and GRE were read >2 weeks apart. After the independent readings, the two raters met to determine CMB presence by consensus. Results: Mean age was 58.0±7.6 years, 65% were women, 23% had hypertension and 8.6% had diabetes. By consensus, CMBs were seen in 30 participants (12.2%) on SWI but in only 13 (5.2%) on GRE (p<0.001). Inter-rater reliability was moderately good on SWI (kappa 0.52, 95% CI 0.34-0.71) and GRE (kappa 0.51, 95% CI 0.30-0.73). A pattern of lobar CMBs, with or without cerebellar CMBs but without other non-lobar CMBs, was seen in 8/13 (62%) with GRE CMBs and 19/30 with SWI CMBs (63%). Increased age and diabetes were associated with CMBs on both SWI and GRE. Conclusions: More than twice as many CMBs were detected on MRI SWI compared to GRE, with the same inter-rater reliability. SWI may be the preferred sequence for detecting CMBs, given its greater sensitivity. However, CMB distribution patterns and risk factors were similar regardless of sequence type, suggesting that the findings of studies using either sequence are comparable.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStrokeSame topicIntracerebral and Subarachnoid Hemorrhage ResearchFrench-language works237,207