MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2493461058 · doi:10.17925/enr.2010.05.01.100

nordic fMRI Solution - Products for Enhancing the Development of a Functional Imaging Clinical Practice

2010· article· en· W2493461058 on OpenAlexaff
Catherine L. Elsinger, Attila Schwarcz, Tamás Dóczi

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Neurological Review · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsNordic Life Science Pipeline (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNeurosurgeryFunctional magnetic resonance imagingMagnetic resonance imagingMedical physicsPlan (archaeology)Clinical PracticeRadiologyPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the last few years we have witnessed increased adoption of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) technology in clinical settings. fMRI is rapidly gaining acceptance as a pre-operative planning tool. Functional imaging data provide critical information to the neurosurgeon for considering therapeutic approaches that might not be considered due to procedural risk. The goal is to accurately delineate tissue pathology from surrounding eloquent cortex and examine vital connections between brain regions, aiding decision-making and maintaining a balance between a more aggressive resection approach and reducing post-operative deficits. In this article we describe the solution NordicNeuroLab has developed to support this technology and illustrate the method employed in the Department of Neurosurgery at Pecs University Medical School in Hungary to assess pre-operative risk and plan surgery for patients with brain tumours.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.010

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.284 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Neurological ReviewSame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207