Deep learning prediction of stroke thrombus red blood cell content from multiparametric MRI
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Thrombus red blood cell (RBC) content has been shown to be a significant factor influencing the efficacy of acute ischemic stroke treatment. In this study, our objective was to evaluate the ability of convolutional neural networks (CNNs) to predict ischemic stroke thrombus RBC content using multiparametric MR images. MATERIALS AND METHODS: *, quantitative susceptibility mapping and late-echo GRE magnitude image slices were used to train and test a 3-layer CNN through cross-validation. Data augmentation techniques involving input equalization and random image transformation were employed to improve network performance. The network was assessed for its ability to quantitatively predict RBC content and to classify thrombi into RBC-rich and RBC-poor groups. RESULTS: The CNN predicted thrombus RBC content with an accuracy of 62% (95% CI 48-76%) when trained on the original dataset and improved to 72% (95% CI 60-84%) on the augmented dataset. The network classified thrombi as RBC-rich or poor with an accuracy of 71% (95% CI 58-84%) and an area under the curve of 0.72 (95% CI 0.57-0.87) when trained on the original dataset and improved to 80% (95% CI 69-91%) and 0.84 (95% CI 0.73-0.95), respectively, on the augmented dataset. CONCLUSIONS: The CNN was able to accurately predict thrombus RBC content using multiparametric MR images, and could provide a means to guide treatment strategy in acute ischemic stroke.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".