ArticleClinical neuroradiology2014
Diffusion tensor imaging in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis--increased sensitivity with optimized region-of-interest delineation.
Article in Clinical neuroradiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of White Matter Tracts Fractional Anisotropy Using Tract-Based Spatial Statistics and Its correlation with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Functional Rating Scale Score in Patients with Motor Neuron Disease.The Indian journal of radiology & imaging · 2021Article
- Serial MRI studies over 12 months using manual and atlas-based region of interest in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.BMC medical imaging · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeDiagnosis of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) can be difficult from clinical symptoms alone. Diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) has been suggested as an adjunct diagnostic method. DTI parameter changes have been repeatedly demonstrated, especially in the corticospinal tract (CST) as the predominantly affected structure. However, a recent meta-analysis reported only a modest discriminatory capability, questioning the value of this method as a confirmatory test in single subjects with suspected ALS. We investigated how methodological differences in CST delineation influence the discriminatory capability.
methodsDTI data were acquired in 13 ALS patients and an age-matched healthy control group. We calculated and compared receiver operation characteristic (ROC) curves of four different analysis methods using either a manual or an atlas-based region of interest (ROI) of the CST in combination with and without tract-based spatial statistics (TBSS).
resultsThe analysis method combining atlas-based ROIs with TBSS yielded an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.936 and a sensitivity and specificity of 100 % and 91.67 %. These are the best results among the four analysis methods evaluated: manual ROIs (AUC = 0.846, sensitivity: 69.23, specificity: 91.67), atlas-based ROIs alone (AUC = 0.917, sensitivity: 76.92, specificity: 91.67), manual ROIs in combination with TBSS (AUC = 0.885, sensitivity: 76.92, specificity: 91.67).
conclusionsSensitivity and specificity strongly depend on the CST delineation approach. The combination of an atlas-based ROI with TBSS is a promising fully automatic method with improved discriminatory capability compared to other approaches. It could ultimately serve as a confirmatory test in single ALS patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23670494What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.