Multisite MRI reproducibility of lateral ventricular volume using the NAIMS cooperative pilot dataset
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The North American Imaging in Multiple Sclerosis (NAIMS) multisite project identified interscanner reproducibility issues with T1-based whole brain volume (WBV). Lateral ventricular volume (LVV) acquired on T2-fluid-attenuated inverse recovery (FLAIR) scans has been proposed as a robust proxy measure. Therefore, we sought to determine the relative magnitude of scanner-induced T2-FLAIR-based LVV and T1-based WBV measurement errors in relation to clinically meaningful changes. METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of the NAIMS pilot dataset in which a relapsing-remitting MS patient with no intrastudy clinical or radiological activity was imaged twice on seven different Siemens scanners across the United States. LVV was determined using the automated NeuroSTREAM technique on T2-FLAIR and WBV was determined with SIENAX on high-resolution T1-MPRAGE. Average LVV and WBV were measured, and absolute intrascanner and interscanner coefficients of variation (CoVs) were calculated. The variabilities were compared to previously established annual pathological and clinically meaningful cutoffs of 0.40% for WBV and of 3.51% for LVV. RESULTS: Mean LVV across all seven scan/rescan pairs was 45.87 ± 1.15 ml. Average LVV intrascanner CoV was 1.42% and interscanner CoV was 1.78%, both smaller than the reported annualized clinically meaningful cutoff of 3.51%. In contrast, intra- and interscanner CoVs for WBV (0.99% and 1.15%) were both higher than the established cutoff of 0.40%. Individually, 1/7 intrasite and 2/7 intersite pair-wise LVV comparisons were above the 3.51% cutoff, whereas 4/7 intrasite and 7/7 intersite WBV comparisons were above the 0.40% cutoff. CONCLUSION: Fully automated LVV segmentation has higher absolute variability than WBV, but much lower relative variability compared to clinically relevant changes, and may therefore be a meaningful proxy outcome measure of neurodegeneration.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".