MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2781645547 · doi:10.3174/ajnr.a5504

What Have We Learned from Perfusion MRI in Multiple Sclerosis?

2018· review· en· W2781645547 on OpenAlexafffund
Emmanuelle Lapointe, David K.B. Li, Anthony Traboulsee, Alexander Rauscher

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Neuroradiology · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersChugai PharmaceuticalSanofi GenzymeEMD SeronoMultiple Sclerosis Society of CanadaF. Hoffmann-La RocheTeva Pharmaceutical IndustriesBiogenSanofi
KeywordsMedicineMultiple sclerosisPerfusionMagnetic resonance imagingNeuroscienceRadiologyImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using MR imaging, perfusion can be assessed either by dynamic susceptibility contrast MR imaging or arterial spin-labeling. Alterations of cerebral perfusion have repeatedly been described in multiple sclerosis compared with healthy controls. Acute lesions exhibit relative hyperperfusion in comparison with normal-appearing white matter, a finding mostly attributed to inflammation in this stage of lesion development. In contrast, normal-appearing white and gray matter of patients with MS has been mostly found to be hypoperfused compared with controls, and correlations with cognitive impairment as well as fatigue in multiple sclerosis have been described. Mitochondrial failure, axonal degeneration, and vascular dysfunction have been hypothesized to underlie the perfusion MR imaging findings. Clinically, perfusion MR imaging could allow earlier detection of the acute focal inflammatory changes underlying relapses and new lesions, and could constitute a marker for cognitive dysfunction in MS. Nevertheless, the clinical relevance and pathogenesis of the brain perfusion changes in MS remain to be clarified.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.006
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.160
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations66
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of NeuroradiologySame topicAdvanced MRI Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207