MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Odense-Oxford PET Image Analysis (OPETIA): An FSL-based toolbox for multimodal neuroimaging

2025· article· en· W4410465919 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Mohammadtaha Parsayan, Sasan Andalib, Thomas Lund Andersen, Habib Ganjgahi, Poul Flemming Høilund‐Carlsen, Abass Alavi, Mojtaba Zarei

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroImage · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchGenentechIXICOH. Lundbeck A/SNational Institutes of HealthSyddansk UniversitetOdense UniversitetshospitalEisaiServierLundbeckfondenNorthern California Institute for Research and EducationPfizerNovartis Pharmaceuticals CorporationBiogenEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers SquibbBioClinicaU.S. Department of DefenseAlzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging InitiativeMeso Scale DiagnosticsAlzheimer's Association
KeywordsNeuroimagingToolboxPsychologyComputer scienceNeuroscienceProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advanced analysis of MRI and PET images provides quantitative and accurate information about the brain structure and function, allowing differential diagnosis, prognosis, and personalized treatment. Most clinical software lack accurate quantification. Here we developed a user-friendly multimodal neuroimage analysis toolbox, named Odense-Oxford PET Image Analysis (OPETIA), based on Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Brain Software Library (FSL) and Python programming language. FSL is a strong toolbox library for MRI analysis but has not been widely used for PET image analysis. OPETIA includes a graphical user interface that facilitates automatic multimodal neuroimage analysis. OPETIA can automatically pre-process magnetic resonance and PET images and calculates maximum, mean, and standard deviation of Standardized Uptake Value (SUV) and Standardized Uptake Value Ratio (SUVR) in the volumes of interest (VOI). To assess the efficacy of OPETIA, we analysed a set of static 18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET and MRIs of healthy subjects and patients with Alzheimer’s disease (AD) from the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) dataset using OPETIA and compared the SUVR measurements with those obtained from Statistical Parametric Mapping, version 12 (SPM12). The result of this comparison showed a close association between OPETIA and SPM12 results (p-value < 0.01, r > 0.8). OPETIA measurements were significantly (p-value < 0.01) larger than those of SPM12 in all brain regions (according to the Harvard-Oxford brain atlas), indicating a systematic difference between these tools. The Cronbach’s Alpha values for both tools were > 0.9, indicating a high reproducibility. We compared the group difference (control vs Alzheimer’s disease) obtained from each toolbox using two-sample t-test and found a significantly (p-value < 0.01) larger Cohen’s d values for SUVRs from OPETIA (d=0.22) than SPM12 (d=0.04). We suggest that OPETIA is a user-friendly and robust tool for quantitative analysis of multimodal neuroimaging such as cerebral PET and 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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0330.013

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.332 · 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
GenreSoftware

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroImageSame topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207