MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2332064267 · doi:10.1097/nen.0b013e3182676388

Neuropathologic Correlates of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Multiple Sclerosis

2012· review· en· W2332064267 on OpenAlexafffund
G. R. Wayne Moore, Cornelia Laule

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuropathology & Experimental Neurology · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsVancouver General HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaInternational Collaboration On Repair Discoveries
FundersUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsMagnetic resonance imagingMultiple sclerosisPathologyMedicineHistopathologyNeuroscienceRadiologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The advent of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has revolutionized concepts of the pathogenesis of multiple sclerosis (MS). Magnetic resonance imaging provides the ability to delineate the evolution of the disease process over time; captured static snapshots can then be used in pathologic correlations studies. Certain patterns in the 2- or 3-dimensional MRI sphere correlate very well with similar patterns of histopathology. A multimodality approach that makes use of numerous MRI techniques can lead to significant insights into the nature of the changes in the CNS. MRI-pathology correlation studies in MS are being performed using newer MRI techniques as they become available. Such correlations and basic histopathologic studies have shown abnormalities in MS far beyond the well-documented changes in the plaque and have brought into question the dogma that MS is an initially inflammatory nondegenerative disease. This review briefly outlines technical considerations in MRI-pathology correlative studies and describes the past and current status of our ability to correlate focal and diffuse changes on the MRI with neuropathologic findings in MS patients.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations20
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neuropathology & Experimental NeurologySame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207