MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392233358 · doi:10.1002/hipo.23602

Comparison of histological delineations of medial temporal lobe cortices by four independent neuroanatomy laboratories

2024· article· en· W4392233358 on OpenAlexafffund
Anika Wuestefeld, Hannah Baumeister, Jenna N. Adams, Robin de Florès, Carl J. Hodgetts, Negar Mazloum‐Farzaghi, Rosanna K. Olsen, Vyash Puliyadi, Tammy Tran, Arnold Bakker, Kelsey L. Canada, Marshall A. Dalton, Ana M. Daugherty, Renaud La Joie, Lei Wang, Madigan L. Bedard, Esther Buendia, Eunice Chung, Amanda E Denning, María del Mar Arroyo Jiménez, Emilio Artacho‐Pérula, David J. Irwin, Ranjit Ittyerah, Edward B. Lee, Sydney Lim, María del Pilar Marcos‐Rabal, María M. Martín, Mónica Muñoz, Carlos de la Rosa‐Prieto, Theresa Schuck, Winifred Trotman, Alicia Vela, Paul A. Yushkevich, Katrin Amunts, Jean C. Augustinack, Song‐Lin Ding, Ricardo Insausti, Olga Kedo, David Berron, Laura E.M. Wisse

Bibliographic record

VenueHippocampus · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsBaycrest HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersDirectorate for Biological SciencesNational Institutes of HealthUniversidad de Castilla-La ManchaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMarcus Wallenbergs Stiftelse för Internationellt Vetenskapligt SamarbeteEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentEuropean CommissionAlzheimer SocietyNational Institute on AgingAlzheimer's AssociationWenner-Gren FoundationHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilLunds Universitet
KeywordsNeuroanatomyTemporal lobeNeurosciencePsychologyLobeAnatomyBiologyEpilepsy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The medial temporal lobe (MTL) cortex, located adjacent to the hippocampus, is crucial for memory and prone to the accumulation of certain neuropathologies such as Alzheimer's disease neurofibrillary tau tangles. The MTL cortex is composed of several subregions which differ in their functional and cytoarchitectonic features. As neuroanatomical schools rely on different cytoarchitectonic definitions of these subregions, it is unclear to what extent their delineations of MTL cortex subregions overlap. Here, we provide an overview of cytoarchitectonic definitions of the entorhinal and parahippocampal cortices as well as Brodmann areas (BA) 35 and 36, as provided by four neuroanatomists from different laboratories, aiming to identify the rationale for overlapping and diverging delineations. Nissl-stained series were acquired from the temporal lobes of three human specimens (two right and one left hemisphere). Slices (50 μm thick) were prepared perpendicular to the long axis of the hippocampus spanning the entire longitudinal extent of the MTL cortex. Four neuroanatomists annotated MTL cortex subregions on digitized slices spaced 5 mm apart (pixel size 0.4 μm at 20× magnification). Parcellations, terminology, and border placement were compared among neuroanatomists. Cytoarchitectonic features of each subregion are described in detail. Qualitative analysis of the annotations showed higher agreement in the definitions of the entorhinal cortex and BA35, while the definitions of BA36 and the parahippocampal cortex exhibited less overlap among neuroanatomists. The degree of overlap of cytoarchitectonic definitions was partially reflected in the neuroanatomists' agreement on the respective delineations. Lower agreement in annotations was observed in transitional zones between structures where seminal cytoarchitectonic features are expressed less saliently. The results highlight that definitions and parcellations of the MTL cortex differ among neuroanatomical schools and thereby increase understanding of why these differences may arise. This work sets a crucial foundation to further advance anatomically-informed neuroimaging research on the human MTL cortex.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.430
Threshold uncertainty score0.412

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.303 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations14
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHippocampusSame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207