MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3204817302 · doi:10.1155/2021/3729379

Multilevel Clustering-Evolutionary Random Support Vector Machine Cluster Algorithm-Based Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Diagnosing Cerebral Ischemic Stroke

2021· article· en· W3204817302 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kun Fan, Ting Zhang, Weihong He

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Programming · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurological Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFunctional magnetic resonance imagingSupport vector machineAlgorithmCluster analysisMagnetic resonance imagingCognitionIschemic strokeArtificial intelligenceMedicineMachine learningPattern recognition (psychology)Computer scienceInternal medicinePsychiatryIschemiaRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study was to explore the value of the blood oxygenation level dependent-functional magnetic resonance imaging (BOLD-fMRI) image classification based on the multilevel clustering-evolutionary random support vector machine cluster (MCRSVMC) algorithm in the diagnosis and treatment of patients with cognitive impairment after cerebral ischemic stroke (CIS). The MCRSVMC algorithm was optimized using a clustering algorithm, and it was compared with other algorithms in terms of accuracy (ACC), sensitivity (SEN), and specificity (SPE) of classifying the brain area images. 36 patients with cognitive impairment after CIS and nondementia patients were divided into a control group (drug treatment) and an intervention group (drug + acupuncture) according to different treatment methods, with 18 cases in each group. The changes in regional homogeneity (ReHo) of BOLD-fMRI images and the differences in scores of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment Scale (MoCA), scores of Loewenstein Occupational Therapy Cognitive Assessment (LOTCA), and scores of Functional Independence Measure (FIM) between the two groups of patients were compared before and after treatment. The results revealed that the average classification ACC, SEN, and SPE of the MCRSVMC algorithm were 84.25 ± 4.13%, 91.07 ± 3.51%, and 89 ± 3.96%, respectively, which were all obviously better than those of other algorithms ( P < 0.01 ). When the number of support vector machine (SVM) classifiers and the number of important features were 410 and 260, respectively, the classification ACC of MCRSVMC algorithm was 0.9429 and 0.9092, respectively. After treatment, the MoCA score, LOTCA score, and FIM score of the patients in the intervention group were higher than those of the control group ( P < 0.05 ). The ReHo values of the right inferior temporal gyrus and right inferior frontal gyrus of patients in the intervention group were much higher than those of the control group ( P < 0.05 ). It indicated that the classification ACC, SEN, and SPE of the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) based on the MCRSVMC algorithm in this study were greatly improved, and the acupuncture method was more effective in the treatment of patients with cognitive dysfunction after CIS.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ProgrammingSame topicNeurological Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207