The Value of Brain Resting-State Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging on Image Registration Algorithm in Analyzing Abnormal Changes of Neuronal Activity in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this paper was to analyze the application value of resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (FMRI) parameters and rigid transformation algorithm in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM), which could provide a theoretical basis for the registration application of FMRI. 107 patients confirmed pathologically as T2DM and 51 community medical healthy volunteers were selected and divided into an experimental group and a control group, respectively. Besides, all the subjects were scanned with FMRI. Then, the rigid transformation-principal axis algorithm (RT-PAA), Levenberg–Marquardt iterative closest point (LMICP), and Demons algorithm were applied to magnetic resonance image registration. It was found that RT-PAA was superior to LMICP and Demons in image registration. The amplitude of low-frequency fluctuation (ALFF) values of the left middle temporal gyrus, right middle temporal gyrus, left fusiform gyrus, right inferior occipital gyrus, and left middle occipital gyrus in patients from the experimental group were lower than those of the control group P < 0.05 . The Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA) score was extremely negatively correlated with the ALFF of the left middle temporal gyrus (r = −0.451 and P < 0.001 ) and highly positively associated with the ALFF of the right posterior cerebellar lobe (r = −0.484 and P < 0.001 ). In addition, the MoCA score of patients had a dramatically negative correlation with the ALFF of the left middle temporal gyrus (r = −0.602 and P < 0.001 ) and had a greatly positive correlation with the ALFF of the right posterior cerebellar lobe (r = −0.516 and P < 0.001 ). The results showed that RT-PAA based on rigid transformation in this study had a good registration effect on magnetic resonance images. Compared with healthy volunteers, the left middle temporal gyrus, right middle temporal gyrus, left fusiform gyrus, right inferior occipital gyrus, and left middle occipital gyrus in patients with T2DM showed abnormal neuronal changes and reduced cognitive function.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".