MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4322491365 · doi:10.1038/s43856-023-00262-4

MRI-based deep learning can discriminate between temporal lobe epilepsy, Alzheimer’s disease, and healthy controls

2023· article· en· W4322491365 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications Medicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthGenentechNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeIXICOH. Lundbeck A/SServierEisaiNorthern California Institute for Research and EducationPfizerBiogenBioClinicaF. Hoffmann-La RocheUniversity of Southern CaliforniaEli Lilly and CompanyU.S. Department of DefenseMeso Scale DiagnosticsAlzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging InitiativeNational Institute of Mental HealthNovartis Pharmaceuticals CorporationBristol-Myers SquibbNational Institute on AgingAlzheimer's AssociationFoundation for the National Institutes of Health
KeywordsTemporal lobeEpilepsyNeuroscienceDiseasePsychologyMedicineArtificial intelligencePathologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Radiological identification of temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE) is crucial for diagnosis and treatment planning. TLE neuroimaging abnormalities are pervasive at the group level, but they can be subtle and difficult to identify by visual inspection of individual scans, prompting applications of artificial intelligence (AI) assisted technologies. METHOD: We assessed the ability of a convolutional neural network (CNN) algorithm to classify TLE vs. patients with AD vs. healthy controls using T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans. We used feature visualization techniques to identify regions the CNN employed to differentiate disease types. RESULTS: We show the following classification results: healthy control accuracy = 81.54% (SD = 1.77%), precision = 0.81 (SD = 0.02), recall = 0.85 (SD = 0.03), and F1-score = 0.83 (SD = 0.02); TLE accuracy = 90.45% (SD = 1.59%), precision = 0.86 (SD = 0.03), recall = 0.86 (SD = 0.04), and F1-score = 0.85 (SD = 0.04); and AD accuracy = 88.52% (SD = 1.27%), precision = 0.64 (SD = 0.05), recall = 0.53 (SD = 0.07), and F1 score = 0.58 (0.05). The high accuracy in identification of TLE was remarkable, considering that only 47% of the cohort had deemed to be lesional based on MRI alone. Model predictions were also considerably better than random permutation classifications (p < 0.01) and were independent of age effects. CONCLUSIONS: AI (CNN deep learning) can classify and distinguish TLE, underscoring its potential utility for future computer-aided radiological assessments of epilepsy, especially for patients who do not exhibit easily identifiable TLE associated MRI features (e.g., hippocampal sclerosis).

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.775
Threshold uncertainty score0.694

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.285 · 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