Beware of White Matter Hyperintensities Causing Systematic Errors in Grey Matter Segmentations!
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction Volumetric estimates of subcortical and cortical structures, extracted from T1-weighted MRIs, are widely used in many clinical and research applications. Here, we investigate the impact of the presence of white matter hyperintensities (WMHs) on FreeSurfer grey matter (GM) structure volumes and its possible bias on functional relationships. Methods T1-weighted images from 1077 participants (4321 timepoints) from the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative were processed with FreeSurfer version 6.0.0. WMHs were segmented using a previously validated algorithm on either T2-weighted or Fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) images. Mixed effects models were used to assess the relationships between overlapping WMHs and GM structure volumes and overal WMH burden, as well as to investigate whether such overlaps impact associations with age, diagnosis, and cognitive performance. Results Participants with higher WMH volumes had higher overalps with GM volumes of bilateral caudate, cerebral cortex, putamen, thalamus, pallidum, and accumbens areas (P < 0.0001). When not corrected for WMHs, caudate volumes increased with age (P < 0.0001) and were not different between cognitively healthy individuals and age-matched probable Alzheimer’s disease patients. After correcting for WMHs, caudate volumes decreased with age (P < 0.0001), and Alzheimer’s disease patients had lower caudate volumes than cognitively healthy individuals (P < 0.01). Uncorrected caudate volume was not associated with ADAS13 scores, whereas corrected lower caudate volumes were significantly associated with poorer cognitive performance (P < 0.0001). Conclusions Presence of WMHs leads to systematic inaccuracies in GM segmentations, particularly for the caudate, which can also change clinical associations. While specifically measured for the Freesurfer toolkit, this problem likely affects other algorithms.
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 | 0.026 | 0.128 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.007 |
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".