Visual Rating Scales of White Matter Hyperintensities and Atrophy: Comparison of Computed Tomography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
GoalMagnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the preferred modality for research on structural age-related brain changes. However, computed tomography (CT) is widely available and has practical and cost advantages over MRI for large-scale brain imaging research studies in acutely unwell patients. However, the relationships between MRI and CT measures of white matter hyperintensities (WMH) and atrophy are unclear. We examined the relationships between visual ratings of WMH, atrophy, and old infarcts in patients who had both CT and MRI scans.Materials and MethodsPatients who had both CT and MRI scans in the International Stroke Trial-3 were studied. In both modalities, 2 raters independently completed standardized visual rating scales for WMH, and for central and superficial atrophy using a 5-point scale. In addition, 1 rater recorded old infarcts according to size and location.FindingsSeventy patients with a mean age of 69 years were studied. There were moderate to substantial intrarater CT–MRI agreements for periventricular components of WMH scales (weighted Κappa = .55-.75). Agreements for basal ganglia ratings were lower (weighted Κappa = .18-.44), partly because of the misclassification of prominent perivascular spaces. Atrophy scales showed moderate to substantial CT–MRI agreements (weighted Κappa = .44-.70). MRI was more sensitive in the detection of smaller infarcts and cavitated lesions.ConclusionsStandardized visual rating scales of white matter lesions and atrophy mostly show substantial agreement between CT and MRI. Clinical CT scans have a strong potential for wider exploitation in research studies, particularly in acutely unwell populations. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the preferred modality for research on structural age-related brain changes. However, computed tomography (CT) is widely available and has practical and cost advantages over MRI for large-scale brain imaging research studies in acutely unwell patients. However, the relationships between MRI and CT measures of white matter hyperintensities (WMH) and atrophy are unclear. We examined the relationships between visual ratings of WMH, atrophy, and old infarcts in patients who had both CT and MRI scans. Patients who had both CT and MRI scans in the International Stroke Trial-3 were studied. In both modalities, 2 raters independently completed standardized visual rating scales for WMH, and for central and superficial atrophy using a 5-point scale. In addition, 1 rater recorded old infarcts according to size and location. Seventy patients with a mean age of 69 years were studied. There were moderate to substantial intrarater CT–MRI agreements for periventricular components of WMH scales (weighted Κappa = .55-.75). Agreements for basal ganglia ratings were lower (weighted Κappa = .18-.44), partly because of the misclassification of prominent perivascular spaces. Atrophy scales showed moderate to substantial CT–MRI agreements (weighted Κappa = .44-.70). MRI was more sensitive in the detection of smaller infarcts and cavitated lesions. Standardized visual rating scales of white matter lesions and atrophy mostly show substantial agreement between CT and MRI. Clinical CT scans have a strong potential for wider exploitation in research studies, particularly in acutely unwell populations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".