MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7120176317 · doi:10.1002/alz70856_107471

Enhancing voxel‐level morphometry through Deep Learning‐based MRI Super‐Resolution for detecting Alzheimer's Disease related atrophy

2025· article· en· W7120176317 on OpenAlexaff
Walter Adame‐Gonzalez, Roqaie Moqadam, Yashar Zeighami, Mahsa Dadar

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtrophyMagnetic resonance imagingDiseaseHigh resolutionMedical imaging

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Alzheimer's Disease (AD) is characterized by the accumulation of Amyloid-beta plaques and hyperphosphorylated-tau neuro-fibrillary tangles (NFT). In early stages of the disease, grey matter loss and proteinopathy is localized to the entorhinal cortices, nucleus basalis of Meynert, and hippocampus (Shafiee et. al. 2024). Additionally, atrophy in these regions has been shown to mediate cognitive decline (Xia et. al. 2024). Deformation Based Morphometry (DBM) is a widely-used technique for modelling voxel-wise volume changes with respect to a common template using Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) data. However, DBM is constrained by MRI voxel resolution, making the study of smaller structures more challenging as commonly used MRI images are acquired at ∼1 mm3 voxel size. METHOD: We used baseline T1-weighted MRI images from an ADNI subsample of age-, sex-, and diagnosis balanced individuals (N = 497). We produced high-resolution images by upsampling and denoising the 497 images and the 1 mm3 template using an in-house deep learning method based on autoencoders. For both resolutions, voxel-wise DBM maps were obtained following preprocessing, linear and non-linear registration to an ADNI-specific template (Figure 1). Similarly, voxel-wise linear regressions were performed at both resolutions. We then computed voxel-wise linear regression models to assess the relationship between ADASCog13 scores and DBM maps, including age and sex as covariates. The results were corrected for multiple comparisons using the false discovery rate (FDR) method. RESULT: While the significant regions were consistent between the two models, the high-resolution models yielded more significant voxels (19.23% compared to 18.52%) after FDR correction. In addition, in the high-resolution models, the atrophy patterns were better defined and more localized to the grey matter in temporal cortex, entorhinal cortices, and hippocampus regions, suggesting a reduction in partial volume effects, particularly in the grey-to-white matter interface. For example, the hippocampus head showed significant atrophy in the dentate gyrus and CA4 subfields with the 0.5 mm3 approach that was not visible at 1.0 mm3 resolution (Figure 2, coronal view). CONCLUSION: The proposed super resolution method can enhance our ability to detect subtle atrophy patterns that are most relevant at early stages of the disease.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→