Quantification of 129Xe MRI Ventilation-defect-percent Using Binary-threshold, Gaussian Linear-Binning and K-means Methods: Differences in Asthma and COPD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rationale and Objectives Hyperpolarized 129 Xe magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) provides a way to quantify ventilation heterogeneity as ventilation defect percent (VDP), calculated as the volume of unventilated lung volume normalized to the thoracic cavity volume. Currently used methods for quantifying VDP include (1) binary signal-intensity thresholds (Binary-threshold, BT), (2) Gaussian transformation of signal-intensity histogram with standard deviation thresholds or Gaussian-linear-binning (GLB), and (3) iterative centroid-based clustering of the signal-intensity histogram (k-means). These methods have not been directly compared in patients with asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), in whom ventilation defects are hallmark findings. Our objective was to quantify and compare VDP using these four different methods. Patients and Methods Data from 175 participants ( n =42 healthy, n =43 COPD, n =90 asthma) were retrospectively evaluated using a CNN co-registration and segmentation pipeline and GLB, GLB slice , (slice-wise evaluation of GLB) BT and k-means VDP quantification methods. Linear-regression and Bland-Altman plots were used to quantify inter-method correlations and agreement. Results VDP was significantly different using GLB (Asthma: 6±9%, COPD: 7±7%, p<.001) and BT (Asthma: 6±7%, COPD: 10±8%, p<.001) methods compared to GLB slice (Asthma: 12±13%, COPD: 16±15%, p<.001) and k-means (Asthma: 12±12%, COPD: 25±17%, p<.001). VDP calculated using GLB (R 2 =.64, p<.001), GLB slice (R 2 =.84, p<.001) and BT (R 2 =.84, p<.001) was significantly correlated with k-means VDP. Bland-Altman plots revealed wide 95% confidence intervals of agreement for k-means with GLB/GLB slice (COPD −6%/−1%: 42%/23%; asthma −5%/−10%:16%/10%) and BT (COPD −4%:36%; asthma −6%:19%). Conclusion VDP differences in patients with asthma and COPD calculated using four methods are important to consider for multi-center studies.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".