MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3155628755 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0247813

3D-Fast Gray Matter Acquisition with Phase Sensitive Inversion Recovery Magnetic Resonance Imaging at 3 Tesla: Application for detection of spinal cord lesions in patients with multiple sclerosis

2021· article· en· W3155628755 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Adrien Goujon, Sonia Mirafzal, Kévin Zuber, Romain Deschamps, Jean‐Claude Sadik, Olivier Gout, Julien Savatovsky, Augustin Lecler

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsMedicineLesionMultiple sclerosisSpinal cordMagnetic resonance imagingNuclear medicineConfidence intervalCordRadiologyPathologySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To compare 3D-Fast Gray Matter Acquisition with Phase Sensitive Inversion Recovery (3D-FGAPSIR) with conventional 3D-Short-Tau Inversion Recovery (3D-STIR) and sagittal T1-and T2-weighted MRI dataset at 3 Tesla when detecting MS spinal cord lesions. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This prospective single-center study was approved by an institutional review board and enrolled participants from December 2016 to August 2018. Two neuroradiologists blinded to all data, individually analyzed the 3D-FGAPSIR and the conventional datasets separately and in random order. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus by a third neuroradiologist. The primary judgment criterion was the number of MS spinal cord lesions. Secondary judgment criteria included lesion enhancement, lesion delineation, reader-reported confidence and lesion-to-cord-contrast-ratio. A Wilcoxon's test was used to compare the two datasets. RESULTS: 51 participants were included. 3D-FGAPSIR detected significantly more lesions than the conventional dataset (344 versus 171 respectively, p<0.001). Two participants had no detected lesion on the conventional dataset, whereas 3D-FGAPSIR detected at least one lesion. 3/51 participants had a single enhancing lesion detected by both datasets. Lesion delineation and reader-reported confidence were significantly higher with 3D-FGAPSIR: 4.5 (IQR 1) versus 2 (IQR 0.5), p<0.0001 and 4.5 (IQR 1) versus 2.5 (IQR 0.5), p<0.0001. Lesion-to-cord-contrast-ratio was significantly higher using 3D-FGAPSIR as opposed to 3D-STIR and T2: 1.4 (IQR 0,3) versus 0.4 (IQR 0,1) and 0.3 (IQR 0,1)(p = 0.04). Correlations with clinical data and inter- and intra-observer agreements were higher with 3D-FGAPSIR. CONCLUSION: 3D-FGAPSIR improved overall MS spinal cord lesion detection as compared to conventional set and detected all enhancing lesions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies→French-language works237,207→