MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1980275236 · doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2010.04.004

Advances in perfusion magnetic resonance imaging in Alzheimer's disease

2010· review· en· W1980275236 on OpenAlexaff
Wei Chen, Xiaowei Song, Steven Beyea, Ryan C.N. D’Arcy, Yunting Zhang, Kenneth Rockwood

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences CentreDalhousie UniversityNational Research Council CanadaNational Research Council Institute for Biodiagnostics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMagnetic resonance imagingMedicineDiseaseNuclear magnetic resonancePerfusion scanningPerfusionPathologyRadiologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent research has demonstrated that brain circulation abnormalities, either during task-induced neural activity or at rest, are more commonly associated with Alzheimer's disease (AD) than was previously thought. This is consistent with the increasing attention to the early involvement of vascular risk factors in the development of AD, in addition to the dominating neurodegenerative pathology. Early detection of cerebral perfusion changes could help advance diagnosis and intervention therapies. The present article reviews advances in perfusion magnetic resonance imaging in the study of AD. In general, there are consistent accounts of cerebral hypoperfusion in the temporal and parietal lobes in people with clinically diagnosed AD. In the early stages of the disease, transient hyperperfusion may occur particularly in the prefrontal cortex, possibly as a compensatory effect. Nevertheless, significant variability in the details of perfusion patterns is present in the early phases, making the use of these methods in early diagnosis difficult. Noninvasive perfusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging methods have advantages over nuclear medicine imaging, especially for safe usage in long-term follow-up studies. Optimization of perfusion-weighted imaging techniques is crucial for any future clinical application. Additional studies are needed with optimization likely to come with 3T and higher field strength magnets.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Review
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablelow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Review
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Other designhigh
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.998
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.326 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designNot applicable · Other design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations58
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & DementiaSame topicAdvanced MRI Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207