MR Spectroscopy of the Insula: Within- and between-Session Reproducibility of MEGA-PRESS Measurements of GABA+ and Other Metabolites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The insula plays a critical role in many neuropsychological disorders. Research investigating its neurochemistry with magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) has been limited compared with cortical regions. Here, we investigate the within-session and between-session reproducibility of metabolite measurements in the insula on a 3T scanner. We measure N-acetylaspartate + N-acetylaspartylglutamate (tNAA), creatine + phosphocreatine (tCr), glycerophosphocholine + phosphocholine (tCho), myo-inositol (Ins), glutamate + glutamine (Glx), and γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA) in one cohort using a j-edited MEGA-PRESS sequence. We measure tNAA, tCr, tCho, Ins, and Glx in another cohort with a standard short-TE PRESS sequence as a reference for the reproducibility metrics. All participants were scanned 4 times identically: 2 back-to-back scans each day, on 2 days. Preprocessing was done using LCModel and Gannet. Reproducibility was determined using Pearson’s r, intraclass-correlation coefficients (ICC), coefficients of variation (CV%), and Bland–Altman plots. A MEGA-PRESS protocol requiring averaged results over two 6:45-min scans yielded reproducible GABA measurements (CV% = 7.15%). This averaging also yielded reproducibility metrics comparable to those from PRESS for the other metabolites. Voxel placement inconsistencies did not affect reproducibility, and no sex differences were found. The data suggest that MEGA-PRESS can reliably measure standard metabolites and GABA in the insula.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".