A new MRI rating scale for progressive supranuclear palsy and multiple system atrophy: validity and reliability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To evaluate a standardised MRI acquisition protocol and a new image rating scale for disease severity in patients with progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) and multiple systems atrophy (MSA) in a large multicentre study. METHODS: The MRI protocol consisted of two-dimensional sagittal and axial T1, axial PD, and axial and coronal T2 weighted acquisitions. The 32 item ordinal scale evaluated abnormalities within the basal ganglia and posterior fossa, blind to diagnosis. Among 760 patients in the study population (PSP = 362, MSA = 398), 627 had per protocol images (PSP = 297, MSA = 330). Intra-rater (n = 60) and inter-rater (n = 555) reliability were assessed through Cohen's statistic, and scale structure through principal component analysis (PCA) (n = 441). Internal consistency and reliability were checked. Discriminant and predictive validity of extracted factors and total scores were tested for disease severity as per clinical diagnosis. RESULTS: Intra-rater and inter-rater reliability were acceptable for 25 (78%) of the items scored (≥ 0.41). PCA revealed four meaningful clusters of covarying parameters (factor (F) F1: brainstem and cerebellum; F2: midbrain; F3: putamen; F4: other basal ganglia) with good to excellent internal consistency (Cronbach α 0.75-0.93) and moderate to excellent reliability (intraclass coefficient: F1: 0.92; F2: 0.79; F3: 0.71; F4: 0.49). The total score significantly discriminated for disease severity or diagnosis; factorial scores differentially discriminated for disease severity according to diagnosis (PSP: F1-F2; MSA: F2-F3). The total score was significantly related to survival in PSP (p<0.0007) or MSA (p<0.0005), indicating good predictive validity. CONCLUSIONS: The scale is suitable for use in the context of multicentre studies and can reliably and consistently measure MRI abnormalities in PSP and MSA. Clinical Trial Registration Number The study protocol was filed in the open clinical trial registry (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov) with ID No NCT00211224.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".