MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386807108 · doi:10.1101/2023.09.14.23295596

ReMIND: The Brain Resection Multimodal Imaging Database

2023· preprint· en· W4386807108 on OpenAlexaff
Parikshit Juvekar, Reuben Dorent, Fryderyk Kögl, Erickson Torio, Colton Barr, Laura Rigolo, Colin Galvin, Nick Jowkar, Anees Kazi, Nazim Haouchine, Harneet Cheema, Nassir Navab, Steve Pieper, William M. Wells, Wenya Linda Bi, Alexandra J. Golby, Sarah Frisken, Tina Kapur

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNational Institutes of HealthBrigham and Women's Hospital
KeywordsResectionComputer scienceDatabaseMedicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The standard of care for brain tumors is maximal safe surgical resection. Neuronavigation augments the surgeon's ability to achieve this but loses validity as surgery progresses due to brain shift. Moreover, gliomas are often indistinguishable from surrounding healthy brain tissue. Intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging (iMRI) and ultrasound (iUS) help visualize the tumor and brain shift. iUS is faster and easier to incorporate into surgical workflows but offers a lower contrast between tumorous and healthy tissues than iMRI. With the success of data-hungry Artificial Intelligence algorithms in medical image analysis, the benefits of sharing well-curated data cannot be overstated. To this end, we provide the largest publicly available MRI and iUS database of surgically treated brain tumors, including gliomas (n=92), metastases (n=11), and others (n=11). This collection contains 369 preoperative MRI series, 320 3D iUS series, 301 iMRI series, and 356 segmentations collected from 114 consecutive patients at a single institution. This database is expected to help brain shift and image analysis research and neurosurgical training in interpreting iUS and iMRI.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.616
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.003
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.310 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical ImagingFrench-language works237,207