MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283819867 · doi:10.1097/wco.0000000000001078

Update on myelin imaging in neurological syndromes

2022· review· en· W4283819867 on OpenAlexaff
Sharada Balaji, Poljanka Johnson, Adam Dvorak, Shannon Kolind

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Neurology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsInternational Collaboration On Repair DiscoveriesUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMyelinMultiple sclerosisNeuroimagingNeuroscienceWhite matterMedicineDiseasePathologyLeukodystrophyMagnetic resonance imagingPsychologyCentral nervous systemRadiologyImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Myelin water imaging (MWI) is generally regarded as the most rigorous approach for noninvasive, in-vivo measurement of myelin content, which has been histopathologically validated. As such, it has been increasingly applied to neurological diseases with white matter involvement, especially those affecting myelin. This review provides an overview of the most recent research applying MWI in neurological syndromes. RECENT FINDINGS: Myelin water imaging has been applied in neurological syndromes including multiple sclerosis, Alzheimer's disease, Huntington's disease, traumatic brain injury, Parkinson's disease, cerebral small vessel disease, leukodystrophies and HIV. These syndromes generally showed alterations observable with MWI, with decreased myelin content tending to correlate with lower cognitive scores and worse clinical presentation. MWI has also been correlated with genetic variation in the APOE and PLP1 genes, demonstrating genetic factors related to myelin health. SUMMARY: MWI can detect and quantify changes not observable with conventional imaging, thereby providing insight into the pathophysiology and disease mechanisms of a diverse range of neurological syndromes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.981
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.297
GPT teacher head0.470
Teacher spread0.174 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in NeurologySame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207