MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415525150 · doi:10.1016/j.ynirp.2026.100344

Estimating white matter hyperintensities volume in individuals with stroke using T1-weighted images

2025· preprint· en· W4415525150 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroimage Reports · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicBrain Tumor Detection and Classification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaSimon Fraser University
FundersNIH Office of the DirectorNational Health and Medical Research CouncilNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeMedical Research CouncilCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchFoundation of the American Society of NeuroradiologyBrain FoundationOffice of the DirectorNational Heart Foundation of New ZealandNational Institutes of HealthAmerican Society of Neuroradiology
KeywordsStroke (engine)HyperintensityGold standard (test)LesionVolume (thermodynamics)Magnetic resonance imaging

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stroke recovery outcomes vary across individuals, motivating the search for biomarkers that can improve prediction. White matter hyperintensities (WMH) volume is a leading biomarker candidate, with FLAIR MRI typically used for WMH segmentation; however, T1-weighted (T1) MRI is often more available. Therefore, we evaluated the performance of two automated WMH segmentation methods (WMH-SynthSeg and SAMSEG) to determine whether WMH volume can be reliably estimated using T1 alone. We analyzed imaging data from 227 stroke patients across three datasets spanning early subacute to chronic recovery, each with gold-standard WMH masks and stroke lesion masks manually traced on available T1 and FLAIR scans. WMH was segmented using T1 only as input to WMH-SynthSeg and SAMSEG, as well as using both T1 and FLAIR as input to SAMSEG, as previously implemented in stroke recovery research. Automated WMH segmentations were compared to the gold-standard WMH mask: accuracy was assessed using Dice similarity index (SI) and cluster-level false negative ratio, while agreement was assessed using intraclass correlation, Pearson's correlation, and volume ratio. We used linear mixed-effects models to evaluate whether SI was influenced by factors such as WMH volume, stroke lesion volume, WMH contrast, age, sex, and days since stroke, with dataset as a random effect. WMH-SynthSeg using T1-only input produced more accurate and reliable WMH segmentations compared to SAMSEG with T1-only input and performed comparably to SAMSEG using both T1 and FLAIR input. WMH-SynthSeg using T1-only input may be used for WMH volume estimation in stroke recovery research in the absence of multimodal imaging. Highlights: WMH volume, often assessed via multimodal imaging, predicts post-stroke outcomesT1-only methods would facilitate WMH analysis if multimodal MRI is unavailableIt is unclear how T1-only methods perform in brains with stroke lesionsWe show T1-based WMH-SynthSeg estimates strongly agree with gold standard methodsAccuracy was stable across stroke lesion sizes but varied with WMH volume/contrast.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.154
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.245 · 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