| Title |
A systematic review of brain frontal lobe parcellation techniques in magnetic resonance imaging
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Brain Structure and Function, March 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00429-013-0527-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Simon R. Cox, Karen J. Ferguson, Natalie A. Royle, Susan D. Shenkin, Sarah E. MacPherson, Alasdair M. J. MacLullich, Ian J. Deary, Joanna M. Wardlaw |
| Abstract |
Manual volumetric measurement of the brain's frontal lobe and its subregions from magnetic resonance images (MRIs) is an established method for researching neural correlates of clinical disorders or cognitive functions. However, there is no consensus between methods used to identify relevant boundaries of a given region of interest (ROI) on MRIs, and those used may bear little relation to each other or the underlying structural, functional and connective architecture. This presents challenges for the analysis and synthesis of such results. We therefore performed a systematic literature review to highlight variations in the anatomical boundaries used to measure frontal regions, contextualised by up-to-date evidence from histology, hodology and neuropsychology. We searched EMBASE and MEDLINE for studies in English reporting three-dimensional boundaries for manually delineating the brain's frontal lobe or sub-regional ROIs from MRIs. Exclusion criteria were: exclusive use of co-ordinate grid systems; insufficient detail to allow method replication; publication in grey literature only. Papers were assessed on quality criteria relating to bias, reproducibility and protocol rationale. There was a large degree of variability in the three-dimensional boundaries of all regions used by the 208 eligible papers. Half of the reports did not justify their rationale for boundary selection, and each paper met on average only three quarters of quality criteria. For the frontal lobe and each subregion (frontal pole, anterior cingulate, dorsolateral, inferior-lateral, and orbitofrontal) we identified reproducible methods for a biologically plausible target ROI. It is hoped that this synthesis will guide the design of future volumetric studies of cerebral structure. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 2% |
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| Denmark | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 83 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 18% |
| Researcher | 15 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 17% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 9 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 17 | 19% |
| Unknown | 12 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 24 | 27% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 13% |
| Neuroscience | 10 | 11% |
| Engineering | 8 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 8% |
| Other | 7 | 8% |
| Unknown | 21 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 January 2014.
All research outputs
#16,164,559
of 25,547,904 outputs
Outputs from Brain Structure and Function
#1,116
of 2,030 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#124,108
of 209,033 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brain Structure and Function
#9
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,547,904 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,030 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 209,033 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.