↓ Skip to main content

Neonatal Brain Tissue Classification with Morphological Adaptation and Unified Segmentation

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroinformatics, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
94 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Neonatal Brain Tissue Classification with Morphological Adaptation and Unified Segmentation
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroinformatics, March 2016
DOI 10.3389/fninf.2016.00012
Pubmed ID
Authors

Richard J. Beare, Jian Chen, Claire E. Kelly, Dimitrios Alexopoulos, Christopher D. Smyser, Cynthia E. Rogers, Wai Y. Loh, Lillian G. Matthews, Jeanie L. Y. Cheong, Alicia J. Spittle, Peter J. Anderson, Lex W. Doyle, Terrie E. Inder, Marc L. Seal, Deanne K. Thompson

Abstract

Measuring the distribution of brain tissue types (tissue classification) in neonates is necessary for studying typical and atypical brain development, such as that associated with preterm birth, and may provide biomarkers for neurodevelopmental outcomes. Compared with magnetic resonance images of adults, neonatal images present specific challenges that require the development of specialized, population-specific methods. This paper introduces MANTiS (Morphologically Adaptive Neonatal Tissue Segmentation), which extends the unified segmentation approach to tissue classification implemented in Statistical Parametric Mapping (SPM) software to neonates. MANTiS utilizes a combination of unified segmentation, template adaptation via morphological segmentation tools and topological filtering, to segment the neonatal brain into eight tissue classes: cortical gray matter, white matter, deep nuclear gray matter, cerebellum, brainstem, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), hippocampus and amygdala. We evaluated the performance of MANTiS using two independent datasets. The first dataset, provided by the NeoBrainS12 challenge, consisted of coronal T 2-weighted images of preterm infants (born ≤30 weeks' gestation) acquired at 30 weeks' corrected gestational age (n = 5), coronal T 2-weighted images of preterm infants acquired at 40 weeks' corrected gestational age (n = 5) and axial T 2-weighted images of preterm infants acquired at 40 weeks' corrected gestational age (n = 5). The second dataset, provided by the Washington University NeuroDevelopmental Research (WUNDeR) group, consisted of T 2-weighted images of preterm infants (born <30 weeks' gestation) acquired shortly after birth (n = 12), preterm infants acquired at term-equivalent age (n = 12), and healthy term-born infants (born ≥38 weeks' gestation) acquired within the first 9 days of life (n = 12). For the NeoBrainS12 dataset, mean Dice scores comparing MANTiS with manual segmentations were all above 0.7, except for the cortical gray matter for coronal images acquired at 30 weeks. This demonstrates that MANTiS' performance is competitive with existing techniques. For the WUNDeR dataset, mean Dice scores comparing MANTiS with manually edited segmentations demonstrated good agreement, where all scores were above 0.75, except for the hippocampus and amygdala. The results show that MANTiS is able to segment neonatal brain tissues well, even in images that have brain abnormalities common in preterm infants. MANTiS is available for download as an SPM toolbox from http://developmentalimagingmcri.github.io/mantis.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Germany 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
France 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 87 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 21%
Researcher 18 19%
Student > Master 10 11%
Student > Bachelor 8 9%
Other 8 9%
Other 15 16%
Unknown 15 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 20%
Neuroscience 14 15%
Engineering 8 9%
Psychology 7 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 5%
Other 15 16%
Unknown 26 28%
Attention Score in Context

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 12 April 2016.
All research outputs
#15,329,366
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroinformatics
#532
of 775 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#173,069
of 302,641 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroinformatics
#10
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 775 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 302,641 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.