Is the location of the signal intensity weighted centroid a reliable measurement of fluid displacement within the disc?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Degenerated discs have shorter T2-relaxation time and lower MR signal. The location of the signal-intensity-weighted-centroid reflects the water distribution within a region-of-interest (ROI). This study compared the reliability of the location of the signal-intensity-weighted-centroid to mean signal intensity and area measurements. L4-L5 and L5-S1 discs were measured on 43 mid-sagittal T2-weighted 3T MRI images in adults with back pain. One rater analysed images twice and another once, blinded to measurements. Discs were semi-automatically segmented into a whole disc, nucleus, anterior and posterior annulus. The coordinates of the signal-intensity-weighted-centroid for all regions demonstrated excellent intraclass-correlation-coefficients for intra- (0.99-1.00) and inter-rater reliability (0.97-1.00). The standard error of measurement for the Y-coordinates of the signal-intensity-weighted-centroid for all ROIs were 0 at both levels and 0 to 2.7 mm for X-coordinates. The mean signal intensity and area for the whole disc and nucleus presented excellent intra-rater reliability with intraclass-correlation-coefficients from 0.93 to 1.00, and 0.92 to 1.00 for inter-rater reliability. The mean signal intensity and area had lower reliability for annulus ROIs, with intra-rater intraclass-correlation-coefficient from 0.5 to 0.76 and inter-rater from 0.33 to 0.58. The location of the signal-intensity-weighted-centroid is a reliable biomarker for investigating the effects of disc interventions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.071 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".