Reproducibility and Evolution of Diffusion Mri Measurements Within the Cervical Spinal Cord in Multiple Sclerosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Multiple Sclerosis (MS), there is a large discrepancy between the clinical observations and how the pathology is exhibited on brain images, this is known as the clinical-radiological paradox. One of the hypotheses is that the clinical deficit may be more related to the spinal cord damage than the number or location of lesions in the brain. Therefore, investigating how the spinal cord is damaged becomes an acute challenge to better understand and overcome this paradox. Diffusion MRI is known to provide quantitative figures of neuronal degeneration and axonal loss, in the brain as well as in the spinal cord. In this paper, we propose to investigate how diffusion MRI metrics vary in the different cervical regions with the progression of the disease. We first study the reproducibility of diffusion MRI on healthy volunteers with a test-retest procedure using both standard diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) and multi-compartment Ball-and-Stick models. Then, based on the test re-test quantitative calibration, we provide quantitative figures of pathology evolution between M0 and M12 in the cervical spine on a set of 31 MS patients, exhibiting how the pathology damage spans in the cervical spinal cord.
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 | 0.005 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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".