Calgary Normative Study: design of a prospective longitudinal study to characterise potential quantitative MR biomarkers of neurodegeneration over the adult lifespan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: A number of MRI methods have been proposed to be useful, quantitative biomarkers of neurodegeneration in ageing. The Calgary Normative Study (CNS) is an ongoing single-centre, prospective, longitudinal study that seeks to develop, test and assess quantitative magnetic resonance (MR) methods as potential biomarkers of neurodegeneration. The CNS has three objectives: first and foremost, to evaluate and characterise the dependence of the selected quantitative neuroimaging biomarkers on age over the adult lifespan; second, to evaluate the precision, variability and repeatability of quantitative neuroimaging biomarkers as part of biomarker validation providing proof-of-concept and proof-of-principle; and third, provide a shared repository of normative data for comparison to various disease cohorts. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Quantitative MR mapping of the brain including longitudinal relaxation time (T1), transverse relaxation time (T2), T2*, magnetic susceptibility (QSM), diffusion and perfusion measurements, as well as morphological assessments are performed. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and a brief, self-report medical history will be collected. Mixed regression models will be used to characterise changes in quantitative MR biomarker measures over the adult lifespan. In this report, we describe the study design, strategies to recruit and perform changes to the acquisition protocol from inception to 31 December 2018, planned statistical approach and data sharing procedures for the study. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Participants provide signed informed consent. Changes in quantitative MR biomarkers measured over the adult lifespan as well as estimates of measurement variance and repeatability will be disseminated through peer-reviewed scientific publication.
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 | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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".