MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2998032464 · doi:10.1111/epi.16416

Hippocampal profiling: Localized magnetic resonance imaging volumetry and T2 relaxometry for hippocampal sclerosis

2019· article· en· W2998032464 on OpenAlexafffund
Sjoerd B. Vos, Gavin P. Winston, Olivia Goodkin, Hugh Pemberton, Frederik Barkhof, Ferrán Prados, Marian Galovic, Matthias J. Koepp, Sébastien Ourselin, M. Jorge Cardoso, John S. Duncan

Bibliographic record

VenueEpilepsia · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchMedical Research Council CanadaUniversity College LondonWellcome TrustMedical Research CouncilWellcome
KeywordsHippocampal formationMagnetic resonance imagingHippocampal sclerosisTemporal lobeMedicineRelaxometryHippocampusEpilepsyNeuroscienceNuclear medicineRadiologyPsychologyInternal medicineSpin echo

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Hippocampal sclerosis (HS) is the most common cause of drug-resistant temporal lobe epilepsy, and its accurate detection is important to guide epilepsy surgery. Radiological features of HS include hippocampal volume loss and increased T2 signal, which can both be quantified to help improve detection. In this work, we extend these quantitative methods to generate cross-sectional area and T2 profiles along the hippocampal long axis to improve the localization of hippocampal abnormalities. METHODS: T1-weighted and T2 relaxometry data from 69 HS patients (32 left, 32 right, 5 bilateral) and 111 healthy controls were acquired on a 3-T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanner. Automated hippocampal segmentation and T2 relaxometry were performed and used to calculate whole-hippocampal volumes and to estimate quantitative T2 (qT2) values. By generating a group template from the controls, and aligning this so that the hippocampal long axes were along the anterior-posterior axis, we were able to calculate hippocampal cross-sectional area and qT2 by a slicewise method to localize any volume loss or T2 hyperintensity. Individual patient profiles were compared with normative data generated from the healthy controls. RESULTS: Profiling of hippocampal volumetric and qT2 data could be performed automatically and reproducibly. HS patients commonly showed widespread decreases in volume and increases in T2 along the length of the affected hippocampus, and focal changes may also be identified. Patterns of atrophy and T2 increase in the left hippocampus were similar between left, right, and bilateral HS. These profiles have potential to distinguish between sclerosis affecting volume and qT2 in the whole or parts of the hippocampus, and may aid the radiological diagnosis in uncertain cases or cases with subtle or focal abnormalities where standard whole-hippocampal measurements yield normal values. SIGNIFICANCE: Hippocampal profiling of volumetry and qT2 values can help spatially localize hippocampal MRI abnormalities and work toward improved sensitivity of subtle focal lesions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations47
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpilepsiaSame topicEpilepsy research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207