MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404499069 · doi:10.1002/hbm.70075

Prediction of Post Traumatic Epilepsy Using <scp>MR</scp>‐Based Imaging Markers

2024· article· en· W4404499069 on OpenAlexaff
Haleh Akrami, Wenhui Cui, Paul E. Kim, Christianne Heck, Andrei Irimia, Karim Jerbi, Dileep Nair, Richard M. Leahy, Anand A. Joshi

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Brain Mapping · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMila - Quebec Artificial Intelligence Institute
FundersCongressionally Directed Medical Research ProgramsNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNational Institute on AgingNational Institutes of HealthU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsSupport vector machineReceiver operating characteristicVoxelEpilepsyArtificial intelligenceTraumatic brain injuryPattern recognition (psychology)Random forestArtificial neural networkMagnetic resonance imagingCross-validationFeature (linguistics)NeuroscienceComputer scienceMedicineMachine learningPsychologyRadiologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Post-traumatic epilepsy (PTE) is a debilitating neurological disorder that develops after traumatic brain injury (TBI). Despite the high prevalence of PTE, current methods for predicting its occurrence remain limited. In this study, we aimed to identify imaging-based markers for the prediction of PTE using machine learning. Specifically, we examined three imaging features: Lesion volumes, resting-state fMRI-based measures of functional connectivity, and amplitude of low-frequency fluctuation (ALFF). We employed three machine-learning methods, namely, kernel support vector machine (KSVM), random forest, and an artificial neural network (NN), to develop predictive models. Our results showed that the KSVM classifier, with all three feature types as input, achieved the best prediction accuracy of 0.78 AUC (area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve) using nested cross-validation. Furthermore, we performed voxel-wise and lobe-wise group difference analyses to investigate the specific brain regions and features that the model found to be most helpful in distinguishing PTE from non-PTE populations. Our statistical analysis uncovered significant differences in bilateral temporal lobes and cerebellum between PTE and non-PTE groups. Overall, our findings demonstrate the complementary prognostic value of MR-based markers in PTE prediction and provide new insights into the underlying structural and functional alterations associated with PTE.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.792
Threshold uncertainty score0.733

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman Brain MappingSame topicEpilepsy research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207