A Review of Neuroimaging-Driven Brain Age Estimation for Identification of Brain Disorders and Health Conditions
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Neuroimage analysis has made it possible to perform various anatomical analyses of the brain regions and helps detect different brain conditions/ disorders. Recently, neuroimaging-driven estimation of brain age is introduced as a robust biomarker for detecting different diseases and health conditions. OBJECTIVE: To present a comprehensive review of brain age frameworks concerning: i) designing view: an overview of brain age frameworks based on image modality and methods used, and ii) clinical aspect: an overview of the application of brain age frameworks for detection of neurological disorders or health conditions. METHODS: PubMed is explored to collect 136 articles from January 2010 to June 2021 using "Brain Age Estimation" and "Brain Imaging," along with combinations of other radiological terms. RESULTS & CONCLUSION: The studies presented in this review are evidence of using brain age estimation methods in detecting various brain diseases/conditions. The survey also highlights tools and methods for brain age estimation and addresses some future research directions.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 it