Determining regional brain growth in premature and mature infants in relation to age at MRI using deep neural networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neonatal MRIs are used increasingly in preterm infants. However, it is not always feasible to analyze this data. Having a tool that assesses brain maturation during this period of extraordinary changes would be immensely helpful. Approaches based on deep learning approaches could solve this task since, once properly trained and validated, they can be used in practically any system and provide holistic quantitative information in a matter of minutes. However, one major deterrent for radiologists is that these tools are not easily interpretable. Indeed, it is important that structures driving the results be detailed and survive comparison to the available literature. To solve these challenges, we propose an interpretable pipeline based on deep learning to predict postmenstrual age at scan, a key measure for assessing neonatal brain development. For this purpose, we train a state-of-the-art deep neural network to segment the brain into 87 different regions using normal preterm and term infants from the dHCP study. We then extract informative features for brain age estimation using the segmented MRIs and predict the brain age at scan with a regression model. The proposed framework achieves a mean absolute error of 0.46 weeks to predict postmenstrual age at scan. While our model is based solely on structural T2-weighted images, the results are superior to recent, arguably more complex approaches. Furthermore, based on the extracted knowledge from the trained models, we found that frontal and parietal lobes are among the most important structures for neonatal brain age estimation.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".