Association between altered white matter networks and post operative ventricle volume in shunt-treated pediatric hydrocephalus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to use probabilistic tractography in combination with white matter microstructure metrics to characterize differences in white matter networks between shunt-treated pediatric hydrocephalus patients relative to healthy controls. We were also able to explore the relationship between these white matter networks and postoperative ventricle volume. METHODS: Network-based statistics was used in combination with whole-brain probabilistic tractography to determine dysregulated white matter networks in a sample of patients with pediatric hydrocephalus (n = 8), relative to controls (n = 36). Metrics such as streamline count (SC), as well as the mean of the fractional anisotropy along a tract, axial diffusivity (AD), mean diffusivity (MD), and radial diffusivity (RD) were assessed. In networks that were found to be significantly different for patients with hydrocephalus, tracts were evaluated to assess their relationship with postoperative lateral ventricle volume. RESULTS: Patients with pediatric hydrocephalus had various networks that were either upregulated or downregulated relative to controls across all white matter measures. Predominately, network dysregulation occurred in tracts involving structures located outside of the frontal lobe. Furthermore tracts with values suggesting decreased white matter integrity were not only found between subcortical structures, but also cortical structures. While there were various tracts with white matter metrics that were initially predicted by lateral ventricle volume, only two tracts remained significant following multiple comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: This cross-sectional study in pediatric patients with hydrocephalus and healthy controls demonstrated using whole-brain probabilistic tractography that there are various networks with dysregulated white matter integrity in hydrocephalus patients relative to controls. These dysregulated networks have tracts connecting structures throughout the brain, and the regions were predominately located centrally and posteriorly. Postoperative ventricle volume did not predict the white matter integrity of many tracts. Future studies with larger sample sizes are needed to further understand these results.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 teacher head, 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".