Jenny Crinion

Liam Chalcroft, Jenny Crinion, Cathy J. Price et al.

Segmenting stroke lesions in MRI is challenging due to diverse acquisition protocols that limit model generalisability. In this work, we introduce two physics-constrained approaches to generate synthetic quantitative MRI (qMRI) images that improve segmentation robustness across heterogeneous domains. Our first method, $\texttt{qATLAS}$, trains a neural network to estimate qMRI maps from standard MPRAGE images, enabling the simulation of varied MRI sequences with realistic tissue contrasts. The second method, $\texttt{qSynth}$, synthesises qMRI maps directly from tissue labels using label-conditioned Gaussian mixture models, ensuring physical plausibility. Extensive experiments on multiple out-of-domain datasets show that both methods outperform a baseline UNet, with $\texttt{qSynth}$ notably surpassing previous synthetic data approaches. These results highlight the promise of integrating MRI physics into synthetic data generation for robust, generalisable stroke lesion segmentation. Code is available at https://github.com/liamchalcroft/qsynth

David Sabate Barbera, Mark Huckvale, Victoria Fleming et al.

Anomia (word-finding difficulties) is the hallmark of aphasia, an acquired language disorder most commonly caused by stroke. Assessment of speech performance using picture naming tasks is a key method for both diagnosis and monitoring of responses to treatment interventions by people with aphasia (PWA). Currently, this assessment is conducted manually by speech and language therapists (SLT). Surprisingly, despite advancements in automatic speech recognition (ASR) and artificial intelligence with technologies like deep learning, research on developing automated systems for this task has been scarce. Here we present NUVA, an utterance verification system incorporating a deep learning element that classifies 'correct' versus' incorrect' naming attempts from aphasic stroke patients. When tested on eight native British-English speaking PWA the system's performance accuracy ranged between 83.6% to 93.6%, with a 10-fold cross-validation mean of 89.5%. This performance was not only significantly better than a baseline created for this study using one of the leading commercially available ASRs (Google speech-to-text service) but also comparable in some instances with two independent SLT ratings for the same dataset.