MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2146904625 · doi:10.1109/iembs.2001.1019010

Evaluation of brain atrophy measures in MRI

2005· article· en· W2146904625 on OpenAlexaff
M. Stella Atkins, Jeff Orchard, Melanie Tory

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtrophyMultiple sclerosisMedicineParenchymaNeuroimagingBrain sizeMagnetic resonance imagingNeurosciencePathologyPsychologyRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Other researchers have proposed that the brain parenchymal fraction (or brain atrophy) may be a good surrogate measure for disease progression in patients with multiple sclerosis. This paper considers various factors influencing the measure of the brain parenchymal fraction obtained from head MRI scans. An automatic segmentation method for the brain and for the cerebral spinal fluid is evaluated and the sensitivity of the brain atrophy measure to various parameters is measured. We show that our automatic method can provide robust, reproducible brain atrophy measures.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.149
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies→French-language works237,207→