Parameters from site classification to harmonize <scp>MRI</scp> clinical studies: Application to a multi‐site Parkinson's disease dataset
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multi-site MRI datasets are crucial for big data research. However, neuroimaging studies must face the batch effect. Here, we propose an approach that uses the predictive probabilities provided by Gaussian processes (GPs) to harmonize clinical-based studies. A multi-site dataset of 216 Parkinson's disease (PD) patients and 87 healthy subjects (HS) was used. We performed a site GP classification using MRI data. The outcomes estimated from this classification, redefined like Weighted HARMonization PArameters (WHARMPA), were used as regressors in two different clinical studies: A PD versus HS machine learning classification using GP, and a VBM comparison (FWE-p < .05, k = 100). Same studies were also conducted using conventional Boolean site covariates, and without information about site belonging. The results from site GP classification provided high scores, balanced accuracy (BAC) was 98.39% for grey matter images. PD versus HS classification performed better when the WHARMPA were used to harmonize (BAC = 78.60%; AUC = 0.90) than when using the Boolean site information (BAC = 56.31%; AUC = 0.71) and without it (BAC = 57.22%; AUC = 0.73). The VBM analysis harmonized using WHARMPA provided larger and more statistically robust clusters in regions previously reported in PD than when the Boolean site covariates or no corrections were added to the model. In conclusion, WHARMPA might encode global site-effects quantitatively and allow the harmonization of data. This method is user-friendly and provides a powerful solution, without complex implementations, to clean the analyses by removing variability associated with the differences between sites.
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 | 0.012 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".