Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21835201›Full record

Trial reportJournal of neuroscience methods2011

Spatial and orientational heterogeneity in the statistical sensitivity of skeleton-based analyses of diffusion tensor MR imaging data.

Richard A Edden, Derek K Jones

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of neuroscience methods, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Diffusion MRI with Machine Learning.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

2 authors.

Richard A EddenRussell H Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA. raee2@jhu.edu
Derek K Jones

Funding

X-LINKED ADRENOLEUKODYSTROPHYP41RR015241 · NCRR · HUGO W. MOSER RES INST KENNEDY KRIEGER · PI MC DONALD, JOHN · 2001 to 2011
$18.5M
TR&D 4: Algorithms for functional and anatomical brain analysisP41EB015909 · NIBIB · HUGO W. MOSER RES INST KENNEDY KRIEGER · PI VAN ZIJL, PETER CM · 2012 to 2020
$13.1M
In Vivo Determination of NAAG in BrainR21MH082322 · NIMH · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI BARKER, PETER B · 2009 to 2010
$473k
NAAG, Glutamate, and GABA in OCDR21MH087799 · NIMH · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI MOHAMED, MONA ADEL · 2010 to 2011
$464k
NCRR NIH HHS P41 RR015241NIBIB NIH HHS P41 EB015909NIMH NIH HHS R21 MH082322NIMH NIH HHS R21 MH087799
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Group comparisons of indices derived from diffusion tensor imaging are common in the literature. An increasingly popular approach to performing such comparisons is the skeleton-projection based approach where, for example, fractional anisotropy (FA) values are projected onto a skeletonized version of the data to minimize differences due to spatial misalignment. In this work, we examine the spatial heterogeneity of the statistical power to detect group differences, and show that there is an intrinsic spatial heterogeneity, with more 'central' structures having less variance within a population. Importantly, we also demonstrate a previously unreported feature of skeleton-based analysis methods, that is that the width of the skeleton depends on the relative orientation to the imaging matrix. Due to the way in which the inferential statistics are performed, this means that structures that are obliquely oriented to the imaging matrix are more likely to show significant differences than when aligned with the imaging matrix. This has profound implications for the interpretation of results obtained from such analysis, especially when there are no a priori hypotheses concerning the spatial location of any group differences. For a uniform (DC) offset between two groups, the skeleton projection-based approaches will be most likely to reveal a difference in centrally located white matter structures oriented obliquely to the imaging matrix.

Indexed as

AdultCell PolarityDiffusion Magnetic Resonance ImagingDiffusion Tensor ImagingFemaleHumansMaleNerve Fibers, Myelinated

Identifiers

PMID21835201
PMCPMC3188429

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.