ArticleNeuroImage. Clinical2016
PREVAIL: Predicting Recovery through Estimation and Visualization of Active and Incident Lesions.
Article in NeuroImage. Clinical, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Matrix decomposition for modeling lesion development processes in multiple sclerosis.Biostatistics (Oxford, England) · 2022Article
- Quantitative magnetization transfer imaging in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Brain communications · 2022Review
- Experimental design and sample size considerations in longitudinal magnetic resonance imaging-based biomarker detection for multiple sclerosis.Statistical methods in medical research · 2020Article
- A Spatio-Temporal Model for Longitudinal Image-on-Image Regression.Statistics in biosciences · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe goal of this study was to develop a model that integrates imaging and clinical information observed at lesion incidence for predicting the recovery of white matter lesions in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients.
methodsDemographic, clinical, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data were obtained from 60 subjects with MS as part of a natural history study at the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke. A total of 401 lesions met the inclusion criteria and were used in the study. Imaging features were extracted from the intensity-normalized T1-weighted (T1w) and T2-weighted sequences as well as magnetization transfer ratio (MTR) sequence acquired at lesion incidence. T1w and MTR signatures were also extracted from images acquired one-year post-incidence. Imaging features were integrated with clinical and demographic data observed at lesion incidence to create statistical prediction models for long-term damage within the lesion. VALIDATION: The performance of the T1w and MTR predictions was assessed in two ways: first, the predictive accuracy was measured quantitatively using leave-one-lesion-out cross-validated (CV) mean-squared predictive error. Then, to assess the prediction performance from the perspective of expert clinicians, three board-certified MS clinicians were asked to individually score how similar the CV model-predicted one-year appearance was to the true one-year appearance for a random sample of 100 lesions.
resultsThe cross-validated root-mean-square predictive error was 0.95 for normalized T1w and 0.064 for MTR, compared to the estimated measurement errors of 0.48 and 0.078 respectively. The three expert raters agreed that T1w and MTR predictions closely resembled the true one-year follow-up appearance of the lesions in both degree and pattern of recovery within lesions.
conclusionThis study demonstrates that by using only information from a single visit at incidence, we can predict how a new lesion will recover using relatively simple statistical techniques. The potential to visualize the likely course of recovery has implications for clinical decision-making, as well as trial enrichment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.