MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401826304 · doi:10.1111/jon.13232

Serum glial fibrillary acidic protein as a marker of brain MRI metrics in multiple sclerosis: A scoping review

2024· review· en· W4401826304 on OpenAlexafffund
Noah Marini, Nikolai Lesack, Sama Alizadeh, Aliya Kani, Vanessa Kitchin, Irene M. Vavasour, Cornelia Laule

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroimaging · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsInternational Collaboration On Repair DiscoveriesUniversity of British Columbia
FundersInternational Collaboration on Repair DiscoveriesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCraig H. Neilsen Foundation
KeywordsMedicineMultiple sclerosisWhite matterBiomarkerMagnetic resonance imagingGlial fibrillary acidic proteinCINAHLMEDLINESystematic reviewWeb of sciencePathologyMeta-analysisRadiologyImmunologyPsychiatryPsychological interventionImmunohistochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is heavily relied upon for the diagnosis and monitoring of multiple sclerosis (MS), a chronic, demyelinating disease of the central nervous system. Serum biomarkers may serve as an accessible tool for increasing sensitivity, improving accessibility, corroborating symptoms, and providing additional data to guide clinical management. This scoping review investigates the current understanding of how the serum biomarker glial fibrillary acidic protein (sGFAP) relates to brain MRI metrics. METHODS: We adhered to the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The databases Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL (Ebsco), and Web of Science (University of British Columbia institutional access) were searched on August 24, 2023 using a combination of medical subject headings and keyword terms for the topic of serum biomarkers in MS. RESULTS: A total of 9880 articles were retrieved in total of which 6271 unique titles and abstracts were screened. Twelve of the 259 resultant papers contained sGFAP data and proceeded to extraction. It was found that lesion MRI metrics generally had a positive relationship with sGFAP, while gray matter and white matter metrics, including normal-appearing white matter, were related negatively or not at all. CONCLUSIONS: These results highlight that while sGFAP may not be specific for MS, it may have utility for increasing sensitivity in postdiagnosis monitoring of MS progression.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.474
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.194
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroimagingSame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207