MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2520620547 · doi:10.1002/hbm.23363

Assessing neuronal density in peri‐infarct cortex with PET: Effects of cortical topology and partial volume correction

2016· article· en· W2520620547 on OpenAlexafffund
Thomas Funck, Mohammed Alkuwaiti, Claude Lepage, Peter Zepper, Jeffrey Minuk, Hyman M. Schipper, Alan C. Evans, Alexander Thiel

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Brain Mapping · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General HospitalMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCerebral cortexPositron emission tomographyNuclear medicineNeuroscienceGeodesicCortex (anatomy)MedicineChemistryPsychologyMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The peri‐infarct cortex (PIC) is the site of long‐term physiologic changes after ischemic stroke. Traditional methods for delineating the peri‐infarct gray matter (GM) have used a volumetric Euclidean distance metric to define its extent around the infarct. This metric has limitations in the case of cortical stroke, i.e., those where ischemia leads to infarction in the cortical GM, because the vascularization of the cerebral cortex follows the complex, folded topology of the cortical surface. Instead, we used a geodesic distance metric along the cortical surface to subdivide the PIC into equidistant rings emanating from the infarct border and compared this new approach to a Euclidean distance metric definition. This was done in 11 patients with [F‐18]‐Flumazenil ([18‐F]‐FMZ) positron emission tomography (PET) scans at 2 weeks post‐stroke and at 6 month follow‐up. FMZ is a PET radiotracer with specific binding to the alpha subunits of the type A γ‐aminobutyric acid (GABAA) receptor. Additionally, we used partial‐volume correction (PVC) of the PET images to compensate for potential cortical thinning and long‐term neuronal loss in follow‐up images. The difference in non‐displaceable binding potential (BP ND ) between the stroke unaffected and affected hemispheres was 35% larger in the geodesic versus the Euclidean peri‐infarct models in initial PET images and 48% larger in follow‐up PET images. The inter‐hemispheric BP ND difference was approximately 17–20% larger after PVC when compared to uncorrected PET images. PET studies of peri‐infarct GM in cortical strokes should use a geodesic model and include PVC as a preprocessing step. Hum Brain Mapp 38:326–338, 2017 . © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.826
Threshold uncertainty score0.250

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations12
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman Brain MappingSame topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207