MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2558110624 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0167274

Assessing White Matter Microstructure in Brain Regions with Different Myelin Architecture Using MRI

2016· article· en· W2558110624 on OpenAlexaff
Samuel Groeschel, G Hagberg, Thomas Schultz, Dávid Z. Balla, Uwe Klose, Till‐Karsten Hauser, Thomas Nägele, Oliver Bieri, Thomas Prasloski, Alex L. MacKay, Ingeborg Krägeloh‐Mann, Klaus Scheffler

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsWhite matterMyelinDiffusion MRIFractional anisotropyMagnetization transferNuclear magnetic resonanceRelaxometryMagnetic resonance imagingMaterials scienceBiomedical engineeringNuclear medicineNeuroscienceBiologyMedicinePhysicsRadiologyCentral nervous systemSpin echo

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: We investigate how known differences in myelin architecture between regions along the cortico-spinal tract and frontal white matter (WM) in 19 healthy adolescents are reflected in several quantitative MRI parameters that have been proposed to non-invasively probe WM microstructure. In a clinically feasible scan time, both conventional imaging sequences as well as microstructural MRI parameters were assessed in order to quantitatively characterise WM regions that are known to differ in the thickness of their myelin sheaths, and in the presence of crossing or parallel fibre organisation. RESULTS: We found that diffusion imaging, MR spectroscopy (MRS), myelin water fraction (MWF), Magnetization Transfer Imaging, and Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping were myelin-sensitive in different ways, giving complementary information for characterising WM microstructure with different underlying fibre architecture. From the diffusion parameters, neurite density (NODDI) was found to be more sensitive than fractional anisotropy (FA), underlining the limitation of FA in WM crossing fibre regions. In terms of sensitivity to different myelin content, we found that MWF, the mean diffusivity and chemical-shift imaging based MRS yielded the best discrimination between areas. CONCLUSION: Multimodal assessment of WM microstructure was possible within clinically feasible scan times using a broad combination of quantitative microstructural MRI sequences. By assessing new microstructural WM parameters we were able to provide normative data and discuss their interpretation in regions with different myelin architecture, as well as their possible application as biomarker for WM disorders.

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 score0.576
Threshold uncertainty score0.356

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations49
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207