| Title |
Automatic thalamus and hippocampus segmentation from MP2RAGE: comparison of publicly available methods and implications for DTI quantification
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery, June 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11548-016-1433-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Erhard Næss-Schmidt, Anna Tietze, Jakob Udby Blicher, Mikkel Petersen, Irene K. Mikkelsen, Pierrick Coupé, José V. Manjón, Simon Fristed Eskildsen |
| Abstract |
In both structural and functional MRI, there is a need for accurate and reliable automatic segmentation of brain regions. Inconsistent segmentation reduces sensitivity and may bias results in clinical studies. The current study compares the performance of publicly available segmentation tools and their impact on diffusion quantification, emphasizing the importance of using recently developed segmentation algorithms and imaging techniques. Four publicly available, automatic segmentation methods (volBrain, FSL, FreeSurfer and SPM) are compared to manual segmentation of the thalamus and hippocampus imaged with a recently proposed T1-weighted MRI sequence (MP2RAGE). We evaluate morphometric accuracy on 22 healthy subjects and impact on diffusivity measurements obtained from aligned diffusion-weighted images on a subset of 10 subjects. Compared to manual segmentation, the highest Dice similarity index of the thalamus is obtained with volBrain using a local library ([Formula: see text], [Formula: see text]) followed by volBrain using an external library ([Formula: see text], [Formula: see text]), FSL ([Formula: see text], [Formula: see text]), FreeSurfer ([Formula: see text], [Formula: see text]) and SPM ([Formula: see text], [Formula: see text]). The same order is found for hippocampus with volBrain local ([Formula: see text], [Formula: see text]), volBrain external ([Formula: see text], [Formula: see text]), FSL ([Formula: see text], [Formula: see text]), FreeSurfer ([Formula: see text], [Formula: see text]) and SPM ([Formula: see text], [Formula: see text]). For diffusivity measurements, volBrain provides values closest to those obtained from manual segmentations. volBrain is the only method where FA values do not differ significantly from manual segmentation of the thalamus. Overall we find that volBrain is superior in thalamus and hippocampus segmentation compared to FSL, FreeSurfer and SPM. Furthermore, the choice of segmentation technique and training library affects quantitative results from diffusivity measures in thalamus and hippocampus. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 64 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 15 | 23% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 17% |
| Unknown | 14 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 23% |
| Neuroscience | 14 | 22% |
| Engineering | 5 | 8% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 5% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 6% |
| Unknown | 22 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 29 May 2017.
All research outputs
#20,656,161
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery
#712
of 964 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#285,236
of 369,941 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery
#15
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 964 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 369,941 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.