Alterations of the White Matter in Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis: A Diffusion Tensor Imaging Study With Tract-Based Spatial Statistics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Functional and structural alterations in the gray matter have been observed in patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA). However, little is known about white matter changes in KOA. Here, we evaluated fractional anisotropy (FA), mean diffusivity (MD), axial diffusivity (AD), and radial diffusivity (RD) to investigate potential alterations in the white matter of patients with KOA. Methods A total of 166 patients with KOA, along with 88 age- and sex-matched healthy controls were recruited and underwent brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) data were collected and analyzed using tract-based spatial statistics (TBSS). Statistical significances were determined at p < 0.05 and were corrected by the threshold-free cluster enhancement (TFCE) method. Then, we evaluated potential correlations between FA, MD, AD, RD values and disease duration, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores, and visual analog scale (VAS) scores. Results FA values for the body of corpus callosum, splenium of corpus callosum, bilateral superior longitudinal fasciculus, cingulum, bilateral superior corona radiata, and right posterior corona radiata were significantly higher in patients with KOA than in healthy controls ( p < 0.05, TFCE corrected). Compared with healthy controls, patients with KOA also had significantly lower MD, AD, and RD values of the genu of corpus callosum, body of corpus callosum, splenium of corpus callosum, corona radiata, right posterior thalamic radiation, superior longitudinal fasciculus, and middle cerebellar peduncle ( p < 0.05, TFCE corrected). Negative correlations were detected between WOMAC scores and AD values for the body of the corpus callosum and the splenium of the corpus callosum ( p < 0.05, FDR corrected). Conclusion Patients with KOA exhibited extensive white matter alterations in sensorimotor and pain-related regions. Longitudinal observation studies on the causation between abnormalities in the white matter tracts and KOA is needed in the future.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".