MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3005837005 · doi:10.1002/jmri.27092

Improving Spatial Normalization of Brain Diffusion MRI to Measure Longitudinal Changes of Tissue Microstructure in the Cortex and White Matter

2020· article· en· W3005837005 on OpenAlexafffund
Florencia Jacobacci, Jorge Jovicich, Gonzalo Lerner, Edson Amaro, Jorge L. Armony, Julien Doyon, Valeria Della‐Maggiore

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsMontreal Neurological Institute and HospitalMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University Institute
FundersAgencia Nacional de Promoción Científica y TecnológicaMinistry of DefenseFondo para la Investigación Científica y TecnológicaUniversidad de Buenos AiresRéseau en Bio-Imagerie du Quebec
KeywordsReproducibilityWhite matterDiffusion MRIFractional anisotropySpatial normalizationNormalization (sociology)Diffusion imagingMedicineNuclear medicineComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMathematicsMagnetic resonance imagingRadiologyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Fractional anisotropy (FA) and mean diffusivity (MD) are frequently used to evaluate longitudinal changes in white matter (WM) microstructure. Recently, there has been a growing interest in identifying experience‐dependent plasticity in gray matter using MD. Improving registration has thus become a major goal to enhance the detection of subtle longitudinal changes in cortical microstructure. Purpose To optimize normalization of diffusion tensor images (DTI) to improve registration in gray matter and reduce variability associated with multisession registrations. Study Type Prospective longitudinal study. Subjects Twenty‐one healthy subjects (18–31 years old) underwent nine MRI scanning sessions each. Field Strength/Sequence 3.0T, diffusion‐weighted multiband‐accelerated sequence, MP2RAGE sequence. Assessment Diffusion‐weighted images were registered to standard space using different pipelines that varied in the features used for normalization, namely, the nonlinear registration algorithm (FSL vs. ANTs), the registration target (FA‐based vs. T 1 ‐based templates), and the use of intermediate individual (FA‐based or T 1 ‐based) targets. We compared the across‐session test–retest reproducibility error of these normalization approaches for FA and MD in white and gray matter. Statistical Tests Reproducibility errors were compared using a repeated‐measures analysis of variance with pipeline as the within‐subject factor. Results The registration of FA data to the FMRIB58 FA atlas using ANTs yielded lower reproducibility errors in white matter ( P < 0.0001) with respect to FSL. Moreover, using the MNI152 T 1 template as the target of registration resulted in lower reproducibility errors for MD ( P < 0.0001), whereas the FMRIB58 FA template performed better for FA ( P < 0.0001). Finally, the use of an intermediate individual template improved reproducibility when registration of the FA images to the MNI152 T 1 was carried out within modality (FA–FA) ( P < 0.05), but not via a T 1 ‐based individual template. Data Conclusion A normalization approach using ANTs to register FA images to the MNI152 T 1 template via an individual FA template minimized test–retest reproducibility errors both for gray and white matter. Level of Evidence 1 Technical Efficacy Stage 1 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2020;52:766–775.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations12
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Magnetic Resonance ImagingSame topicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207