MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392884303 · doi:10.1101/2024.03.13.24304177

Normalizing Spinal Cord Compression Morphometric Measures: Application in Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy

2024· preprint· en· W4392884303 on OpenAlexaff
Sandrine Bédard, Jan Valošek, Maryam Seif, Armin Curt, Simon Schading‐Sassenhausen, Nikolai Pfender, Patrick Freund, Markus Hupp, Julien Cohen‐Adad

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical and Thoracic Myelopathy
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineMila - Quebec Artificial Intelligence InstitutePolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSpinal cordSagittal planeSpinal cord compressionLogistic regressionCordPhysical medicine and rehabilitationRadiologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objective Automatic and robust characterization of spinal cord shape from MRI images is relevant to assess the severity of spinal cord compression in degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) and to guide therapeutic strategy. Despite its popularity, the maximum spinal cord compression (MSCC) index has practical limitations to objectively assess the severity of cord compression. Firstly, it is computed by normalizing the anteroposterior cord diameter by that above and below the level of compression, but it does not account for the fact that the spinal cord itself varies in size along the superior-inferior axis, making this MSCC sensitive to the level of compression. Secondly, spinal cord shape varies across individuals, making MSCC also sensitive to the size and shape of every individual. Thirdly, MSCC is typically computed by the expert-rater on a single sagittal slice, which is time-consuming and prone to inter-rater variability. In this study, we propose a fully automatic pipeline to compute MSCC. Methods We extended the traditional MSCC (based on the anteroposterior diameter) to other shape metrics (transverse diameter, area, eccentricity, and solidity), and proposed a normalization strategy using a database of healthy adults (n=203) to address the variability of the spinal cord anatomy between individuals. We validated the proposed method in a cohort of DCM patients (n=120) with manually derived morphometric measures and predicted the therapeutic decision (operative/conservative) using a stepwise binary logistic regression including demographics, clinical scores, and electrophysiological assessment. Results The automatic and normalized MSCC measures significantly correlated with clinical scores and predicted the therapeutic decision with higher accuracy than the manual MSCC. Results show that the sensory dysfunction of the upper extremities (mJOA subscore), the presence of myelopathy and the proposed MRI-based normalized morphometric measures were significant predictors of the therapeutic decision. The model yielded an area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristic of 80%. Conclusion The study introduced an automatic method for computation of normalized MSCC measures of cord compression from MRI scans, which is an important step towards better informed therapeutic decisions in DCM patients. The method is open-source and available in the Spinal Cord Toolbox v6.0.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicCervical and Thoracic MyelopathyFrench-language works237,207