Jacobian integration method increases the statistical power to measure gray matter atrophy in multiple sclerosis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gray matter atrophy provides important insights into neurodegeneration in multiple sclerosis (MS) and can be used as a marker of neuroprotection in clinical trials. Jacobian integration is a method for measuring volume change that uses integration of the local Jacobian determinants of the nonlinear deformation field registering two images, and is a promising tool for measuring gray matter atrophy. Our main objective was to compare the statistical power of the Jacobian integration method to commonly used methods in terms of the sample size required to detect a treatment effect on gray matter atrophy. We used multi-center longitudinal data from relapsing-remitting MS patients and evaluated combinations of cross-sectional and longitudinal pre-processing with SIENAX/FSL, SPM, and FreeSurfer, as well as the Jacobian integration method. The Jacobian integration method outperformed these other commonly used methods, reducing the required sample size by a factor of 4-5. The results demonstrate the advantage of using the Jacobian integration method to assess neuroprotection in MS clinical trials.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it