<scp>Cross‐Scanner</scp> Harmonization of <scp>Neuromelanin‐Sensitive MRI</scp> for Multisite Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Neuromelanin-sensitive magnetic resonance imaging (NM-MRI) is a validated measure of neuromelanin concentration in the substantia nigra-ventral tegmental area (SN-VTA) complex and is a proxy measure of dopaminergic function with potential as a noninvasive biomarker. The development of generalizable biomarkers requires large-scale samples necessitating harmonization approaches to combine data collected across sites. PURPOSE: To develop a method to harmonize NM-MRI across scanners and sites. STUDY TYPE: Prospective. POPULATION: A total of 128 healthy subjects (18-73 years old; 45% female) from three sites and five MRI scanners. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: 3.0 T; NM-MRI two-dimensional gradient-recalled echo with magnetization-transfer pulse and three-dimensional T1-weighted images. ASSESSMENT: NM-MRI contrast (contrast-to-noise ratio [CNR]) maps were calculated and CNR values within the SN-VTA (defined previously by manual tracing on a standardized NM-MRI template) were determined before harmonization (raw CNR) and after ComBat harmonization (harmonized CNR). Scanner differences were assessed by calculating the classification accuracy of a support vector machine (SVM). To assess the effect of harmonization on biological variability, support vector regression (SVR) was used to predict age and the difference in goodness-of-fit (Δr) was calculated as the correlation (between actual and predicted ages) for the harmonized CNR minus the correlation for the raw CNR. STATISTICAL TESTS: Permutation tests were used to determine if SVM classification accuracy was above chance level and if SVR Δr was significant. A P-value <0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: In the raw CNR, SVM MRI scanner classification was above chance level (accuracy = 86.5%). In the harmonized CNR, the accuracy of the SVM was at chance level (accuracy = 29.5%; P = 0.8542). There was no significant difference in age prediction using the raw or harmonized CNR (Δr = -0.06; P = 0.7304). DATA CONCLUSION: ComBat harmonization removes differences in SN-VTA CNR across scanners while preserving biologically meaningful variability associated with age. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: 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 | 0.014 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".