<scp>Test–retest</scp> reliability of diffusion tensor imaging scalars in 5‐year‐olds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) has provided great insights into the microstructural features of the developing brain. However, DTI images are prone to several artifacts and the reliability of DTI scalars is of paramount importance for interpreting and generalizing the findings of DTI studies, especially in the younger population. In this study, we investigated the intrascan test-retest repeatability of four DTI scalars: fractional anisotropy (FA), mean diffusivity (MD), axial diffusivity (AD), and radial diffusivity (RD) in 5-year-old children (N = 67) with two different data preprocessing approaches: a volume censoring pipeline and an outlier replacement pipeline. We applied a region of interest (ROI) and a voxelwise analysis after careful quality control, tensor fitting and tract-based spatial statistics. The data had three subsets and each subset included 31, 32, or 33 directions thus a total of 96 unique uniformly distributed diffusion encoding directions per subject. The repeatability of DTI scalars was evaluated with intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC(3,1)) and the variability between test and retest subsets. The results of both pipelines yielded good to excellent (ICC(3,1) > 0.75) reliability for most of the ROIs and an overall low variability (<10%). In the voxelwise analysis, FA and RD had higher ICC(3,1) values compared to AD and MD and the variability remained low (<12%) across all scalars. Our results suggest high intrascan repeatability in pediatric DTI and lend confidence to the use of the data in future cross-sectional and longitudinal studies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".