Multivariate pattern classification of brain white matter connectivity predicts classic trigeminal neuralgia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Trigeminal neuralgia (TN) is a severe form of chronic facial neuropathic pain. Increasing interest in the neuroimaging of pain has highlighted changes in the root entry zone in TN, but also group-level central nervous system gray and white matter (WM) abnormalities. Group differences in neuroimaging data are frequently evaluated with univariate statistics; however, this approach is limited because it is based on single, or clusters of, voxels. By contrast, multivariate pattern analyses consider all the model's neuroanatomical features to capture a specific distributed spatial pattern. This approach has potential use as a prediction tool at the individual level. We hypothesized that a multivariate pattern classification method can distinguish specific patterns of abnormal WM connectivity of classic TN from healthy controls (HCs). Diffusion-weighted scans in 23 right-sided TN and matched controls were processed to extract whole-brain interregional streamlines. We used a linear support vector machine algorithm to differentiate interregional normalized streamline count between TN and HC. This algorithm successfully differentiated between TN and HC with an accuracy of 88%. The structural pattern emphasized WM connectivity of regions that subserve sensory, affective, and cognitive dimensions of pain, including the insula, precuneus, inferior and superior parietal lobules, and inferior and medial orbital frontal gyri. Normalized streamline counts were associated with longer pain duration and WM metric abnormality between the connections. This study demonstrates that machine-learning algorithms can detect characteristic patterns of structural alterations in TN and highlights the role of structural brain imaging for identification of neuroanatomical features associated with neuropathic pain disorders.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".