MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3144676319 · doi:10.1002/hbm.25398

Beware of white matter hyperintensities causing systematic errors in <scp>FreeSurfer</scp> gray matter segmentations!

2021· article· en· W3144676319 on OpenAlexafffund
Mahsa Dadar, Olivier Potvin, Richard Camicioli, Simon Duchesne

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Brain Mapping · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsCentres Intégré Universitaires de Santé et de Services SociauxUniversité LavalUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Institute on AgingCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlzheimer SocietySanofi
KeywordsWhite matterHyperintensityGray (unit)NeuroscienceMagnetic resonance imagingPsychologyMedicineRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 gray matter (GM) structure volumes and its possible bias on functional relationships. T1-weighted images from 1,077 participants (4,321 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 images. Mixed-effects models were used to assess the relationships between overlapping WMHs and GM structure volumes and overall WMH burden, as well as to investigate whether such overlaps impact associations with age, diagnosis, and cognitive performance. Participants with higher WMH volumes had higher overlaps with GM volumes of bilateral caudate, cerebral cortex, putamen, thalamus, pallidum, and accumbens areas (p < .0001). When not corrected for WMHs, caudate volumes increased with age (p < .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 < .0001), and Alzheimer's disease patients had lower caudate volumes than cognitively healthy individuals (p < .01). Uncorrected caudate volume was not associated with ADAS13 scores, whereas corrected lower caudate volumes were significantly associated with poorer cognitive performance (p < .0001). 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.514
Threshold uncertainty score0.688

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations48
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman Brain MappingSame topicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207