Predicting early symptomatic osteoarthritis in the human knee using machine learning classification of magnetic resonance images from the osteoarthritis initiative
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The purpose of this study is to evaluate the ability of a machine learning algorithm to classify in vivo magnetic resonance images (MRI) of human articular cartilage for development of osteoarthritis (OA). Sixty‐eight subjects were selected from the osteoarthritis initiative (OAI) control and incidence cohorts. Progression to clinical OA was defined by the development of symptoms as quantified by the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis (WOMAC) questionnaire 3 years after baseline evaluation. Multi‐slice T 2 ‐weighted knee images, obtained through the OAI, of these subjects were registered using a nonlinear image registration algorithm. T 2 maps of cartilage from the central weight bearing slices of the medial femoral condyle were derived from the registered images using the multiple available echo times and were classified for “progression to symptomatic OA” using the machine learning tool, weighted neighbor distance using compound hierarchy of algorithms representing morphology (WND‐CHRM). WND‐CHRM classified the isolated T 2 maps for the progression to symptomatic OA with 75% accuracy. Clinical significance: Machine learning algorithms applied to T 2 maps have the potential to provide important prognostic information for the development of OA. © 2017 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 35:2243–2250, 2017.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".