Longitudinal Structural <scp>MRI</scp> in Neurologically Healthy Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Structural brain MRI measures are frequently examined in both healthy and clinical groups, so an understanding of how these measures vary over time is desirable. PURPOSE: To test the stability of structural brain MRI measures over time. POPULATION: In all, 112 healthy volunteers across four sites. STUDY TYPE: Retrospective analysis of prospectively acquired data. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: 3 T, magnetization prepared - rapid gradient echo, and single-shell diffusion sequence. ASSESSMENT: Diffusion, cortical thickness, and volume data from the sensorimotor network were assessed for stability over time across 3 years. Two sites used a Siemens MRI scanner, two sites a Philips scanner. STATISTICAL TESTS: The stability of structural measures across timepoints was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) for absolute agreement, cutoff ≥0.80, indicating high reliability. Mixed-factorial analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to examine between-site and between-scanner type differences in individuals over time. RESULTS: All cortical thickness and gray matter volume measures in the sensorimotor network, plus all diffusivity measures (fractional anisotropy plus mean, axial and radial diffusivities) for primary and premotor cortices, primary somatosensory thalamic connections, and the cortico-spinal tract met ICC. The majority of measures differed significantly between scanners, with a trend for sites using Siemens scanners to produce larger values for connectivity, cortical thickness, and volume measures than sites using Philips scanners. DATA CONCLUSION: Levels of reliability over time for all tested structural MRI measures were generally high, indicating that any differences between measurements over time likely reflect underlying biological differences rather than inherent methodological variability. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4. TECHNICAL EFFICACY STAGE: 1.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".