MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142164352 · doi:10.1002/ana.24341

Magnetic resonance imaging pattern learning in temporal lobe epilepsy: Classification and prognostics

2014· article· en· W2142164352 on OpenAlexafffund
Boris C. Bernhardt, Seok‐Jun Hong, Andrea Bernasconi, Neda Bernasconi

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Neurology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsTemporal lobeMagnetic resonance imagingEpilepsyEntorhinal cortexAtrophyPsychologyCohortHippocampusHippocampal sclerosisConcordanceMedicineInternal medicineNeuroscienceRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: In temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE), although hippocampal atrophy lateralizes the focus, the value of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to predict postsurgical outcome is rather modest. Prediction solely based on the hippocampus may be hampered by widespread mesiotemporal structural damage shown by advanced imaging. Increasingly complex and high-dimensional representation of MRI metrics motivates a shift to machine learning to establish objective, data-driven criteria for pathogenic processes and prognosis. METHODS: We applied clustering to 114 consecutive unilateral TLE patients using 1.5T MRI profiles derived from surface morphology of hippocampus, amygdala, and entorhinal cortex. To evaluate the diagnostic validity of the classification, we assessed its yield to predict outcome in 79 surgically treated patients. Reproducibility of outcome prediction was assessed in an independent cohort of 27 patients evaluated on 3.0T MRI. RESULTS: Four similarly sized classes partitioned our cohort; in all, alterations spanned over the 3 mesiotemporal structures. Compared to 46 controls, TLE-I showed marked bilateral atrophy; in TLE-II atrophy was ipsilateral; TLE-III showed mild bilateral atrophy; whereas TLE-IV showed hypertrophy. Classes differed with regard to histopathology and freedom from seizures. Classwise surface-based classifiers accurately predicted outcome in 92 ± 1% of patients, outperforming conventional volumetry. Predictors of relapse were distributed bilaterally across structures. Prediction accuracy was similarly high in the independent cohort (96%), supporting generalizability. INTERPRETATION: We provide a novel description of individual variability across the TLE spectrum. Class membership was associated with distinct patterns of damage and outcome predictors that did not spatially overlap, emphasizing the ability of machine learning to disentangle the differential contribution of morphology to patient phenotypes, ultimately refining the prognosis of epilepsy surgery.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.160
Threshold uncertainty score0.293

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.280 · 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

Citations160
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of NeurologySame topicEpilepsy research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207