Voxel-based lesion mapping of meningioma: a comprehensive lesion location mapping of 260 lesions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE In the present study the authors aimed to determine preferred locations of meningiomas by avoiding descriptive analysis and instead using voxel-based lesion mapping and 3D image-rendering techniques. METHODS Magnetic resonance images obtained in 248 treatment-naïve meningioma patients with 260 lesions were retrospectively and consecutively collected. All images were registered to a 1-mm isotropic, high-resolution, T1-weighted brain atlas provided by the Montreal Neurological Institute (the MNI152), and a lesion frequency map was created, followed by 3D volume rendering to visualize the preferred locations of meningiomas in 3D. RESULTS The 3D lesion frequency map clearly showed that skull base structures such as parasellar, sphenoid wing, and petroclival regions were commonly affected by the tumor. The middle one-third of the superior sagittal sinus was most commonly affected in parasagittal tumors. Substantial lesion accumulation was observed around the leptomeninges covering the central sulcus and the sylvian fissure, with very few lesions observed at the frontal, parietal, and occipital convexities. CONCLUSIONS Using an objective visualization method, meningiomas were shown to be located around the middle third of the superior sagittal sinus, the perisylvian convexity, and the skull base. These observations, which are in line with previous descriptive analyses, justify further use of voxel-based lesion mapping techniques to help understand the biological nature of this disease.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".