Inconsistencies in atlas-based volumetric measures of the human nucleus basalis of Meynert: A need for high-resolution alternatives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The nucleus basalis of Meynert (nbM) is the major source of cortical acetylcholine (ACh) and has been related to cognitive processes and to neurological disorders. However, spatially delineating the human nbM in MRI studies remains challenging. Due to the absence of a functional localiser for the human nbM, studies to date have localised it using nearby neuroanatomical landmarks or using probabilistic atlases. To understand the feasibility of MRI of the nbM we set our four goals; our first goal was to review current human nbM region-of-interest (ROI) selection protocols used in MRI studies, which we found have reported highly variable nbM volume estimates. Our next goal was to quantify and discuss the limitations of existing atlas-based volumetry of nbM. We found that the identified ROI volume depends heavily on the atlas used and on the probabilistic threshold set. In addition, we found large disparities even for data/studies using the same atlas and threshold. To test whether spatial resolution contributes to volume variability, as our third goal, we developed a novel nbM mask based on the normalized BigBrain dataset. We found that as long as the spatial resolution of the target data was 1.3 mm isotropic or above, our novel nbM mask offered realistic and stable volume estimates. Finally, as our last goal we tried to discern nbM using publicly available and novel high resolution structural MRI ex vivo MRI datasets. We find that, using an optimised 9.4T quantitative T 2 ⁎ ex vivo dataset, the nbM can be visualised using MRI. We conclude caution is needed when applying the current methods of mapping nbM, especially for high resolution MRI data. Direct imaging of the nbM appears feasible and would eliminate the problems we identify, although further development is required to allow such imaging using standard (f)MRI scanning.
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 | 0.033 | 0.104 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".