MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2609254407 · doi:10.1038/s41598-018-19781-5

Perivascular Spaces Segmentation in Brain MRI Using Optimal 3D Filtering

2018· article· en· W2609254407 on OpenAlexafffund
Lucia Ballerini, Ruggiero Lovreglio, María del C. Valdés Hernández, Joel Ramirez, Bradley J. MacIntosh, Sandra E. Black, Joanna M. Wardlaw

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicCerebrospinal fluid and hydrocephalus
Canadian institutionsHeart and Stroke FoundationUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeBrain Research Imaging Centre, University of EdinburghLinda C. Campbell FoundationUniversity of TorontoFondation LeducqEuropean CommissionSunnybrook Research InstituteCanadian Vascular NetworkHeart and Stroke Foundation of CanadaOntario Brain InstituteMrs Gladys Row Fogo Charitable TrustWellcome Trust
KeywordsComputer scienceSegmentationPerivascular spaceArtificial intelligenceMagnetic resonance imagingPattern recognition (psychology)Brain anatomyComputer visionMedicineRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Perivascular Spaces (PVS) are a feature of Small Vessel Disease (SVD), and are an important part of the brain's circulation and glymphatic drainage system. Quantitative analysis of PVS on Magnetic Resonance Images (MRI) is important for understanding their relationship with neurological diseases. In this work, we propose a segmentation technique based on the 3D Frangi filtering for extraction of PVS from MRI. We used ordered logit models and visual rating scales as alternative ground truth for Frangi filter parameter optimization and evaluation. We optimized and validated our proposed models on two independent cohorts, a dementia sample (N = 20) and patients who previously had mild to moderate stroke (N = 48). Results demonstrate the robustness and generalisability of our segmentation method. Segmentation-based PVS burden estimates correlated well with neuroradiological assessments (Spearman's ρ = 0.74, p < 0.001), supporting the potential of our proposed method.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations147
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicCerebrospinal fluid and hydrocephalusFrench-language works237,207