Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24968872›Full record

ArticleNeuroinformatics2014

Software pipeline for midsagittal corpus callosum thickness profile processing : automated segmentation, manual editor, thickness profile generator, group-wise statistical comparison and results display.

Chris Adamson, Richard Beare, Mark Walterfang, Marc Seal

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Neuroinformatics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Caffeine for apnea of prematurity and brain development at 11 years of age.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2018
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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.

Chris AdamsonRoyal Childrens Hospital, 50 Flemington Road Parkville, VIC, Melbourne, 3052, Australia, chris.adamson@mcri.edu.au.
Richard Beare
Mark Walterfang
Marc Seal

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper presents a fully automated pipeline for thickness profile evaluation and analysis of the human corpus callosum (CC) in 3D structural T 1-weighted magnetic resonance images. The pipeline performs the following sequence of steps: midsagittal plane extraction, CC segmentation algorithm, quality control tool, thickness profile generation, statistical analysis and results figure generator. The CC segmentation algorithm is a novel technique that is based on a template-based initialisation with refinement using mathematical morphology operations. The algorithm is demonstrated to have high segmentation accuracy when compared to manual segmentations on two large, publicly available datasets. Additionally, the resultant thickness profiles generated from the automated segmentations are shown to be highly correlated to those generated from the ground truth segmentations. The manual editing tool provides a user-friendly environment for correction of errors and quality control. Statistical analysis and a novel figure generator are provided to facilitate group-wise morphological analysis of the CC.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsSoftwareAutomationCorpus CallosumHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMagnetic Resonance Imaging

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.