Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24818817›Full record

ArticleMagnetic resonance imaging2014

Stable Atlas-based Mapped Prior (STAMP) machine-learning segmentation for multicenter large-scale MRI data.

Eun Young Kim, Vincent A Magnotta, Dawei Liu, Hans J Johnson

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Magnetic resonance imaging, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Apathy Is Related to Cognitive Control and Striatum Volumes in Prodromal Huntington's Disease.Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society : JINS · 2019
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

4 authors.

Eun Young KimDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Iowa, Iowa, IA 52242, USA. Electronic address: eunyoung-kim@uiowa.edu.
Vincent A MagnottaDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Iowa, Iowa, IA 52242, USA; Department of Radiology, University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA.
Dawei LiuDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA.
Hans J JohnsonDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Iowa, Iowa, IA 52242, USA; Department of Psychiatry, University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA.

Funding

NEUROBIOLOGICAL PREDICTORS OF HUNTINGTON'S DISEASER01NS040068 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF IOWA · PI PAULSEN, JANE S · 2001 to 2013
$48.5M
Washington University ConsoritumU54EB005149 · NIBIB · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI JOHNSON, HANS · 2004 to 2013
$39.3M
X-LINKED ADRENOLEUKODYSTROPHYP41RR015241 · NCRR · HUGO W. MOSER RES INST KENNEDY KRIEGER · PI MC DONALD, JOHN · 2001 to 2011
$18.5M
Validation of Structural/Functional MRI LocalizationR01EB000975 · NIBIB · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI BARTA, PATRICK E, MILLER, MICHAEL I · 2002 to 2012
$3.0M
3D Shape Analysis for Computational AnatomyR01EB008171 · NIBIB · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI MILLER, MICHAEL I · 2009 to 2012
$2.0M
Cognitive and functional brain changes in preclinical Huntington's disease (HD)R01NS054893 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF IOWA · PI PAULSEN, JANE S · 2007 to 2011
$2.0M
BRAINS Morphology and Image AnalysisR01NS050568 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF IOWA · PI MAGNOTTA, VINCENT A · 2007 to 2009
$1.0M
Enterprise Storage In A Collaborative Neuroimaging EnvironmentS10RR023392 · NCRR · UNIVERSITY OF IOWA · PI JOHNSON, HANS JOSEPH · 2007 to 2007
$405k
DISSEMINATION OF CROSS-PLATFORM SOFTWARE FOR ARTIFACT DETECTION AND REGION OF INTR03EB008673 · NIBIB · MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI GHOSH, SATRAJIT SUJIT, WHITFIELD-GABRIELI, SUSAN · 2008 to 2008
$162k
NCRR NIH HHS P41 RR015241NCRR NIH HHS S10 RR023392NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB000975NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB008171NIBIB NIH HHS R03 EB008673NIBIB NIH HHS U54 EB005149NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS040068NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS050568NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS054893
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Machine learning (ML)-based segmentation methods are a common technique in the medical image processing field. In spite of numerous research groups that have investigated ML-based segmentation frameworks, there remains unanswered aspects of performance variability for the choice of two key components: ML algorithm and intensity normalization. This investigation reveals that the choice of those elements plays a major part in determining segmentation accuracy and generalizability. The approach we have used in this study aims to evaluate relative benefits of the two elements within a subcortical MRI segmentation framework. Experiments were conducted to contrast eight machine-learning algorithm configurations and 11 normalization strategies for our brain MR segmentation framework. For the intensity normalization, a Stable Atlas-based Mapped Prior (STAMP) was utilized to take better account of contrast along boundaries of structures. Comparing eight machine learning algorithms on down-sampled segmentation MR data, it was obvious that a significant improvement was obtained using ensemble-based ML algorithms (i.e., random forest) or ANN algorithms. Further investigation between these two algorithms also revealed that the random forest results provided exceptionally good agreement with manual delineations by experts. Additional experiments showed that the effect of STAMP-based intensity normalization also improved the robustness of segmentation for multicenter data sets. The constructed framework obtained good multicenter reliability and was successfully applied on a large multicenter MR data set (n>3000). Less than 10% of automated segmentations were recommended for minimal expert intervention. These results demonstrate the feasibility of using the ML-based segmentation tools for processing large amount of multicenter MR images. We demonstrated dramatically different result profiles in segmentation accuracy according to the choice of ML algorithm and intensity normalization chosen.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsArtificial IntelligenceModels, AnatomicBrainComputer SimulationFeasibility StudiesHumansImage EnhancementImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedMagnetic Resonance ImagingPattern Recognition, AutomatedPhantoms, ImagingReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificitySoftwareSoftware ValidationMachine learningMulticenter studyRandom forestSegmentation

Identifiers

PMID24818817
PMCPMC4099271

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.