Increased Brain Volumetric Measurement Precision from Multi-Site 3D T1-weighted 3T Magnetic Resonance Imaging by Correcting Geometric Distortions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanner-specific geometric distortions may contribute to scanner induced variability and decrease volumetric measurement precision for multi-site studies. The purpose of this study was to determine whether geometric distortion correction increases the precision of brain volumetric measurements in a multi-site multi-scanner study. Geometric distortion variation was quantified over a one-year period at 10 sites using the distortion fields estimated from monthly 3D T1-weighted MRI geometrical phantom scans. The variability of volume and distance measurements were quantified using synthetic volumes and a standard quantitative MRI (qMRI) phantom. The effects of geometric distortion corrections on MRI derived volumetric measurements of the human brain were assessed in two subjects scanned on each of the 10 MRI scanners and in 150 subjects with cerebrovascaular disease (CVD) acquired across imaging sites. Geometric distortions were found to vary substantially between different MRI scanners but were relatively stable on each scanner over a one-year interval. Geometric distortions varied spatially, increasing in severity with distance from the magnet isocenter. In measurements made with the qMRI phantom, the geometric distortion correction decreased the standard deviation of volumetric assessments by 35% and distance measurements by 42%. The average coefficient of variance decreased by 16% in gray matter and white matter volume estimates in the two subjects scanned on the 10 MRI scanners. Geometric distortion correction using an up-to-date correction field is recommended to increase precision in volumetric measurements made from MRI images.
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 | 0.009 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".