High-resolution <em>In Vivo</em> Manual Segmentation Protocol for Human Hippocampal Subfields Using 3T Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The human hippocampus has been broadly studied in the context of memory and normal brain function and its role in different neuropsychiatric disorders has been heavily studied. While many imaging studies treat the hippocampus as a single unitary neuroanatomical structure, it is, in fact, composed of several subfields that have a complex three-dimensional geometry. As such, it is known that these subfields perform specialized functions and are differentially affected through the course of different disease states. Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging can be used as a powerful tool to interrogate the morphology of the hippocampus and its subfields. Many groups use advanced imaging software and hardware (>3T) to image the subfields; however this type of technology may not be readily available in most research and clinical imaging centers. To address this need, this manuscript provides a detailed step-by-step protocol for segmenting the full anterior-posterior length of the hippocampus and its subfields: cornu ammonis (CA) 1, CA2/CA3, CA4/dentate gyrus (DG), strata radiatum/lacunosum/moleculare (SR/SL/SM), and subiculum. This protocol has been applied to five subjects (3F, 2M; age 29-57, avg. 37). Protocol reliability is assessed by resegmenting either the right or left hippocampus of each subject and computing the overlap using the Dice's kappa metric. Mean Dice's kappa (range) across the five subjects are: whole hippocampus, 0.91 (0.90-0.92); CA1, 0.78 (0.77-0.79); CA2/CA3, 0.64 (0.56-0.73); CA4/dentate gyrus, 0.83 (0.81-0.85); strata radiatum/lacunosum/moleculare, 0.71 (0.68-0.73); and subiculum 0.75 (0.72-0.78). The segmentation protocol presented here provides other laboratories with a reliable method to study the hippocampus and hippocampal subfields in vivo using commonly available MR tools.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.050 | 0.028 |
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".