MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2770385342 · doi:10.1002/hbm.23894

Validation of <scp>T</scp>1w‐based segmentations of white matter hyperintensity volumes in large‐scale datasets of aging

2017· article· en· W2770385342 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Brain Mapping · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersNational Institute on AgingNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Foundation for InnovationNational Institutes of HealthGovernment of CanadaNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNorthern California Institute for Research and EducationCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchDana FoundationUniversity of Southern CaliforniaU.S. Department of DefenseAlzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging InitiativePfizerFoundation for the National Institutes of Health
KeywordsFluid-attenuated inversion recoveryHyperintensityMagnetic resonance imagingWhite matterMedicineNuclear medicinePsychologyRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Fluid-attenuated Inversion Recovery (FLAIR) and dual T2w and proton density (PD) magnetic resonance images (MRIs) are considered to be the optimum sequences for detecting white matter hyperintensities (WMHs) in aging and Alzheimer's disease populations. However, many existing large multisite studies forgo their acquisition in favor of other MRI sequences due to economic and time constraints. METHODS: In this article, we have investigated whether FLAIR and T2w/PD sequences are necessary to detect WMHs in Alzheimer's and aging studies, compared to using only T1w images. Using a previously validated automated tool based on a Random Forests classifier, WMHs were segmented for the baseline visits of subjects from ADC, ADNI1, and ADNI2/GO studies with and without T2w/PD and FLAIR information. The obtained WMH loads (WMHLs) in different lobes were then correlated with manually segmented WMHLs, each other, age, cognitive, and clinical measures to assess the strength of the correlations with and without using T2w/PD and FLAIR information. RESULTS: The WMHLs obtained from T1w-Only segmentations correlated with the manual WMHLs (ADNI1: r = .743, p < .001, ADNI2/GO: r = .904, p < .001), segmentations obtained from T1w + T2w + PD for ADNI1 (r = .888, p < .001) and T1w + FLAIR for ADNI2/GO (r = .969, p < .001), age (ADNI1: r = .391, p < .001, ADNI2/GO: r = .466, p < .001), and ADAS13 (ADNI1: r = .227, p < .001, ADNI2/GO: r = .190, p < 0.001), and NPI (ADNI1: r = .290, p < .001, ADNI2/GO: r = 0.144, p < .001), controlling for age. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that while T2w/PD and FLAIR provide more accurate estimates of the true WMHLs, T1w-Only segmentations can still provide estimates that hold strong correlations with the actual WMHLs, age, and performance on various cognitive/clinical scales, giving added value to datasets where T2w/PD or FLAIR are not available.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.161
Threshold uncertainty score0.386

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.300 · 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