MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3176951054 · doi:10.1016/j.nicl.2021.102734

Multiple sclerosis and subclinical neuropathology in healthy individuals with familial risk: A scoping review of MRI studies

2021· review· en· W3176951054 on OpenAlexaff
Matin Mortazavi, Öznur Hizarci, Lisa Ann Gerdes, Joachim Havla, Tania Kümpfel, Reinhard Hohlfeld, Sophia Stöcklein, Daniel Keeser, Birgit Ertl‐Wagner

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroImage Clinical · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationUniversity of TorontoHospital for Sick Children
FundersBundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung
KeywordsNeuropathologySubclinical infectionMultiple sclerosisMedicineDiseaseWhite matterEpidemiologyPathologyMagnetic resonance imagingPsychiatryRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multiple genetic and non-heritable factors have been linked to the risk of multiple sclerosis (MS). These factors seem to contribute to disease pathogenesis before the onset of clinical symptoms, as suggested by incidental MRI evidence of subclinical MS neuropathology in individuals without clinical symptoms. Individuals with high familial risk for MS, such as first-degree relatives of patients with MS, can be studied by MRI to characterize the neuropathology during a subclinical period of MS. 16 studies published in English, which performed brain MRI on healthy individuals with high familial risk of MS were included in this scoping review. Studies suggest either no conclusive (5), or inconclusive yet considerable (4), or conclusive evidence (7) for the incidence of subclinical neuropathology, including focal and diffuse tissue damage. Across all studies, white matter lesions fulfilling MS criteria were observed in 86 of 613 individuals (14%). Future research is needed to evaluate the longitudinal dynamics and clinical relevance of preclinical imaging abnormalities in MS.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.084
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.519
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.084
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.004
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 head0.423
GPT teacher head0.528
Teacher spread0.105 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroImage ClinicalSame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207