Semi-automatic segmentation of the fetal brain from magnetic resonance imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Volumetric measurements of fetal brain maturation in the third trimester of pregnancy are key predictors of developmental outcomes. Improved understanding of fetal brain development trajectories may aid in identifying and clinically managing at-risk fetuses. Currently, fetal brain structures in magnetic resonance images (MRI) are often manually segmented, which requires both time and expertise. To facilitate the targeting and measurement of brain structures in the fetus, we compared the results of five segmentation methods applied to fetal brain MRI data to gold-standard manual tracings. Methods Adult women with singleton pregnancies ( n = 21), of whom five were scanned twice, approximately 3 weeks apart, were recruited [26 total datasets, median gestational age (GA) = 34.8, IQR = 30.9–36.6]. T2-weighted single-shot fast spin echo images of the fetal brain were acquired on 1.5T and 3T MRI scanners. Images were first combined into a single 3D anatomical volume. Next, a trained tracer manually segmented the thalamus, cerebellum, and total cerebral volumes. The manual segmentations were compared with five automatic methods of segmentation available within Advanced Normalization Tools (ANTs) and FMRIB’s Linear Image Registration Tool (FLIRT) toolboxes. The manual and automatic labels were compared using Dice similarity coefficients (DSCs). The DSC values were compared using Friedman’s test for repeated measures. Results Comparing cerebellum and thalamus masks against the manually segmented masks, the median DSC values for ANTs and FLIRT were 0.72 [interquartile range (IQR) = 0.6–0.8] and 0.54 (IQR = 0.4–0.6), respectively. A Friedman’s test indicated that the ANTs registration methods, primarily nonlinear methods, performed better than FLIRT ( p < 0.001). Conclusion Deformable registration methods provided the most accurate results relative to manual segmentation. Overall, this semi-automatic subcortical segmentation method provides reliable performance to segment subcortical volumes in fetal MR images. This method reduces the costs of manual segmentation, facilitating the measurement of typical and atypical fetal brain development.
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 | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".