Diffusion tensor imaging of the corpus callosum in healthy aging: Investigating higher order polynomial regression modelling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) studies confirmed the vulnerability of corpus callosum (CC) fibers to aging. However, most studies employed lower order regressions to study the relationship between age and white matter microstructure. The present study investigated whether higher order polynomial regression modelling can better describe the relationship between age and CC DTI metrics compared to lower order models in 140 healthy participants (ages 18-85). The CC was found to be non-uniformly affected by aging, with accelerated and earlier degradation occurring in anterior portion; callosal volume, fiber count, fiber length, mean fibers per voxel, and FA decreased with age while mean, axial, and radial diffusivities increased. Half of the parameters studied also displayed significant age-sex interaction or intracranial volume effects. Higher order models were chosen as the best fit, based on Bayesian Information Criterion minimization, in 16 out of 23 significant cases when describing the relationship between DTI measurements and age. Higher order model fits provided different estimations of aging trajectory peaks and decline onsets than lower order models; however, a likelihood ratio test found that higher order regressions generally did not fit the data significantly better than lower order polynomial or linear models. The results contrast the modelling approaches and highlight the importance of using higher order polynomial regression modelling when investigating associations between age and CC white matter microstructure.
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 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".