Using UK Biobank data to establish population-specific atlases from whole body MRI
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Reliable reference data in medical imaging is largely unavailable. Developing tools that allow for the comparison of individual patient data to reference data has a high potential to improve diagnostic imaging. Population atlases are a commonly used tool in medical imaging to facilitate this. Constructing such atlases becomes particularly challenging when working with highly heterogeneous datasets, such as whole-body images, which contain significant anatomical variations. METHOD: In this work, we propose a pipeline for generating a standardised whole-body atlas for a highly heterogeneous population by partitioning the population into anatomically meaningful subgroups. Using magnetic resonance images from the UK Biobank dataset, we create six whole-body atlases representing a healthy population average. We furthermore unbias them, and this way obtain a realistic representation of the population. In addition to the anatomical atlases, we generate probabilistic atlases that capture the distributions of abdominal fat (visceral and subcutaneous) and five abdominal organs across the population (liver, spleen, pancreas, left and right kidneys). RESULTS: Our pipeline effectively generates high-quality, realistic whole-body atlases with clinical applicability. The probabilistic atlases show differences in fat distribution between subjects with medical conditions such as diabetes and cardiovascular diseases and healthy subjects in the atlas space. CONCLUSIONS: With this work, we make the constructed anatomical and label atlases publically available, with the expectation that they will support medical research involving whole-body MR images.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.004 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".