MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038114637 · doi:10.1016/j.nicl.2015.02.015

Stochastic process for white matter injury detection in preterm neonates

2015· article· en· W2038114637 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Irene Cheng, Steven P. Miller, Emma G. Duerden, Kaiyu Sun, Vann Chau, Elysia Adams, Kenneth J. Poskitt, Helen M. Branson, Anup Basu

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroImage Clinical · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal and fetal brain pathology
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenBC Children's HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Alberta
FundersMitacsMichael Smith Health Research BCCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlberta InnovatesChildren Neurodevelopmental Disorders Network
KeywordsFalse positive paradoxWhite matterSimilarity (geometry)Ground truthComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMedicinePediatricsMagnetic resonance imagingRadiologyImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Preterm births are rising in Canada and worldwide. As clinicians strive to identify preterm neonates at greatest risk of significant developmental or motor problems, accurate predictive tools are required. Infants at highest risk will be able to receive early developmental interventions, and will also enable clinicians to implement and evaluate new methods to improve outcomes. While severe white matter injury (WMI) is associated with adverse developmental outcome, more subtle injuries are difficult to identify and the association with later impairments remains unknown. Thus, our goal was to develop an automated method for detection and visualization of brain abnormalities in MR images acquired in very preterm born neonates. We have developed a technique to detect WMI in T1-weighted images acquired in 177 very preterm born infants (24-32 weeks gestation). Our approach uses a stochastic process that estimates the likelihood of intensity variations in nearby pixels; with small variations being more likely than large variations. We first detect the boundaries between normal and injured regions of the white matter. Following this we use a measure of pixel similarity to identify WMI regions. Our algorithm is able to detect WMI in all of the images in the ground truth dataset with some false positives in situations where the white matter region is not segmented accurately.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.294
Threshold uncertainty score0.459

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 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

Citations12
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroImage ClinicalSame topicNeonatal and fetal brain pathologyFrench-language works237,207