MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403274708 · doi:10.1093/braincomms/fcae359

The use of 7T MRI in multiple sclerosis: review and consensus statement from the North American Imaging in Multiple Sclerosis Cooperative

2024· review· en· W4403274708 on OpenAlexafffund
Daniel M. Harrison, Pascal Sati, Eric C. Klawiter, Sridar Narayanan, Francesca Bagnato, Erin Beck, Peter B. Barker, Alberto Calvi, Alessandro Cagol, Maxime Donadieu, Jeff H. Duyn, Cristina Granziera, Roland G. Henry, Susie Y. Huang, Michael N. Hoff, Caterina Mainero, Daniel Ontaneda, Daniel S. Reich, David A. Rudko, Seth A. Smith, Siegfried Trattnig, Jonathan Zurawski, Rohit Bakshi, Susan A. Gauthier, Cornelia Laule

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain Communications · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsInternational Collaboration On Repair DiscoveriesUniversity of British ColumbiaMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersEurostarsNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Science FoundationGuarantors of BrainInternational Collaboration on Repair DiscoveriesEuropean Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple SclerosisMultiple Sclerosis SocietyDr. Miriam and Sheldon G. Adelson Medical Research FoundationU.S. Department of Veterans AffairsCraig H. Neilsen FoundationNational Institutes of HealthSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsMultiple sclerosisStatement (logic)Magnetic resonance imagingMedicineConsensus conferencePsychologyRadiologyPsychiatryPhilosophyInternal medicineEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of ultra-high-field 7-Tesla (7T) MRI in multiple sclerosis (MS) research has grown significantly over the past two decades. With recent regulatory approvals of 7T scanners for clinical use in 2017 and 2020, the use of this technology for routine care is poised to continue to increase in the coming years. In this context, the North American Imaging in MS Cooperative (NAIMS) convened a workshop in February 2023 to review the previous and current use of 7T technology for MS research and potential future research and clinical applications. In this workshop, experts were tasked with reviewing the current literature and proposing a series of consensus statements, which were reviewed and approved by the NAIMS. In this review and consensus paper, we provide background on the use of 7T MRI in MS research, highlighting this technology's promise for identification and quantification of aspects of MS pathology that are more difficult to visualize with lower-field MRI, such as grey matter lesions, paramagnetic rim lesions, leptomeningeal enhancement and the central vein sign. We also review the promise of 7T MRI to study metabolic and functional changes to the brain in MS. The NAIMS provides a series of consensus statements regarding what is currently known about the use of 7T MRI in MS, and additional statements intended to provide guidance as to what work is necessary going forward to accelerate 7T MRI research in MS and translate this technology for use in clinical practice and clinical trials. This includes guidance on technical development, proposals for a universal acquisition protocol and suggestions for research geared towards assessing the utility of 7T MRI to improve MS diagnostics, prognostics and therapeutic efficacy monitoring. The NAIMS expects that this article will provide a roadmap for future use of 7T MRI in MS.

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)0.036
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.049
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.189

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0360.049
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0080.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0060.003
Research integrity0.0070.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.394
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.021 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations18
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrain CommunicationsSame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207