MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2764244909 · doi:10.1038/s41598-017-13339-7

Partial volume correction for PET quantification and its impact on brain network in Alzheimer’s disease

2017· article· en· W2764244909 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jiarui Yang, Chenhui Hu, Ning Guo, Joyita Dutta, Lucia M. Vaina, Keith A. Johnson, Jorge Sepulcre, Georges El Fakhri, Quanzheng Li

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthGenentechIXICOH. Lundbeck A/SServierEisaiNorthern California Institute for Research and EducationBioClinicaF. Hoffmann-La RocheUniversity of Southern CaliforniaBiogenU.S. Department of DefenseMeso Scale DiagnosticsAlzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging InitiativeNovartis Pharmaceuticals CorporationPfizerEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers SquibbNational Institute on AgingAlzheimer's AssociationFoundation for the National Institutes of Health
KeywordsPartial volumePositron emission tomographyArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceSegmentationPattern recognition (psychology)Volume (thermodynamics)Alzheimer's diseaseNeuroimagingNuclear medicineMedicinePathologyDiseaseNeurosciencePhysicsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) imaging is a valuable tool for research and diagnosis in Alzheimer's disease (AD). Partial volume effects caused by the limited spatial resolution of PET scanners degrades the quantitative accuracy of PET image. In this study, we have applied a method to evaluate the impact of a joint-entropy based partial volume correction (PVC) technique on brain networks learned from a clinical dataset of AV-45 PET image and compare network properties of both uncorrected and corrected image-based brain networks. We also analyzed the region-wise SUVRs of both uncorrected and corrected images. We further performed classification tests on different groups using the same set of algorithms with same parameter settings. PVC has sometimes been avoided due to increased noise sensitivity in image registration and segmentation, however, our results indicate that appropriate PVC may enhance the brain network structure analysis for AD progression and improve classification performance.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.709
Threshold uncertainty score0.374

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.337 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations51
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207