Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20688559›Full record

ArticleMedical image analysis2011

DRAMMS: Deformable registration via attribute matching and mutual-saliency weighting.

Yangming Ou, Aristeidis Sotiras, Nikos Paragios, Christos Davatzikos

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical image analysis, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 199 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
199citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

199 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Longitudinal registration of TMagnetic resonance imaging · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. MULTISCALE ESTIMATION OF MORPHOMETRICITY FOR REVEALING NEUROANATOMICAL BASIS OF COGNITIVE TRAITS.Proceedings. IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging · 2024
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

139 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Yangming OuSection of Biomedical Image Analysis, University of Pennsylvania, 3600 Market St., Ste 380, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. Yangming.Ou@uphs.upenn.edu
Aristeidis Sotiras
Nikos Paragios
Christos Davatzikos

Funding

COMPUTATIONAL NEUROANATOMY OF AGING USING SHAPE ANALYSISR01AG014971 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI DAVATZIKOS, CHRISTOS · 1999 to 2015
$3.5M
NIA NIH HHS R01 AG014971
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A general-purpose deformable registration algorithm referred to as "DRAMMS" is presented in this paper. DRAMMS bridges the gap between the traditional voxel-wise methods and landmark/feature-based methods with primarily two contributions. First, DRAMMS renders each voxel relatively distinctively identifiable by a rich set of attributes, therefore largely reducing matching ambiguities. In particular, a set of multi-scale and multi-orientation Gabor attributes are extracted and the optimal components are selected, so that they form a highly distinctive morphological signature reflecting the anatomical and geometric context around each voxel. Moreover, the way in which the optimal Gabor attributes are constructed is independent of the underlying image modalities or contents, which renders DRAMMS generally applicable to diverse registration tasks. A second contribution of DRAMMS is that it modulates the registration by assigning higher weights to those voxels having higher ability to establish unique (hence reliable) correspondences across images, therefore reducing the negative impact of those regions that are less capable of finding correspondences (such as outlier regions). A continuously-valued weighting function named "mutual-saliency" is developed to reflect the matching uniqueness between a pair of voxels implied by the tentative transformation. As a result, voxels do not contribute equally as in most voxel-wise methods, nor in isolation as in landmark/feature-based methods. Instead, they contribute according to the continuously-valued mutual-saliency map, which dynamically evolves during the registration process. Experiments in simulated images, inter-subject images, single-/multi-modality images, from brain, heart, and prostate have demonstrated the general applicability and the accuracy of DRAMMS.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsSubtraction TechniqueBrainHumansImage EnhancementImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedMagnetic Resonance ImagingPattern Recognition, AutomatedReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and Specificity

Identifiers

PMID20688559
PMCPMC3012150

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.