Combining Multiple Magnetic Resonance Imaging Sequences Provides Independent Reproducible Radiomics Features
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To evaluate the relative contribution of different Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) sequences for the extraction of radiomics features in a cohort of patients with lacrimal gland tumors. This prospective study was approved by the Institutional Review Board and signed informed consent was obtained from all participants. From December 2015 to April 2017, 37 patients with lacrimal gland lesions underwent MRI before surgery, including axial T1-WI, axial Diffusion-WI, coronal DIXON-T2-WI and coronal post-contrast DIXON-T1-WI. Two readers manually delineated both lacrimal glands to assess inter-observer reproducibility, and one reader performed two successive delineations to assess intra-observer reproducibility. Radiomics features were extracted using an in-house software to calculate 85 features per region-of-interest (510 features/patient). Reproducible features were defined as features presenting both an intra-class correlation coefficient ≥0.8 and a concordance correlation coefficient ≥0.9 across combinations of the three delineations. Among these features, the ones yielding redundant information were identified as clusters using hierarchical clustering based on the Spearman correlation coefficient. All the MR sequences provided reproducible radiomics features (range 14(16%)-37(44%)) and non-redundant clusters (range 5-14). The highest numbers of features and clusters were provided by the water and in-phase DIXON T2-WI and water and in-phase post-contrast DIXON T1-WI (37, 26, 26 and 26 features and 14,12, 9 and 11 clusters, respectively). A total of 145 reproducible features grouped into 51 independent clusters was provided by pooling all the MR sequences. All MRI sequences provided reproducible radiomics features yielding independent information which could potentially serve as biomarkers.
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 | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".