ArticleWorld journal of radiology2015
Inter- and intra-rater reliability of diffusion tensor imaging parameters in the normal pediatric spinal cord.
Article in World journal of radiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review of repeatability and reproducibility studies of diffusion tensor imaging of cervical spinal cord.The British journal of radiology · 2023Pooled it
- Test-Retest Reliability and Inter-Scanner Reproducibility of Improved Spinal Diffusion Tensor Imaging.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Clinical Utility of Diffusion Tensor Imaging as a Biomarker to Identify Microstructural Changes in Pediatric Spinal Cord Injury.Topics in spinal cord injury rehabilitation · 2022Article
- Clinical application of diffusion tensor tractography to postoperative C5 palsy.Spinal cord series and cases · 2021Article
- Reliability of pre-operative diffusion tensor imaging parameter measurements of the cervical spine in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Quantification of DTI in the Pediatric Spinal Cord: Application to Clinical Evaluation in a Healthy Patient Population.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2019Article
- Spatially selective 2D RF inner field of view (iFOV) diffusion kurtosis imaging (DKI) of the pediatric spinal cord.NeuroImage. Clinical · 2016Article
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
aimTo assess inter- and intra-rater reliability (agreement) between two region of interest (ROI) methods in pediatric spinal cord diffusion tensor imaging (DTI).
methodsInner-Field-of-View DTI data previously acquired from ten pediatric healthy subjects (mean age = 12.10 years) was used to assess for reliability. ROIs were drawn by two neuroradiologists on each subject data twice within a 3-mo interval. ROIs were placed on axial B0 maps along the cervical spine using free-hand and fixed-size ROIs. Agreement analyses for fractional anisotropy (FA), axial diffusivity, radial diffusivity and mean diffusivity were performed using intra-class-correlation (ICC) and Cronbach's alpha statistical methods.
resultsInter- and intra-rater agreement between the two ROI methods showed moderate (ICC = 0.5) to strong (ICC = 0.84). There were significant differences between raters in the number of pixels selected using free-hand ROIs (P < 0.05). However, no significant differences were observed in DTI parameter values. FA showed highest variability in ICC values (0.10-0.87). Cronbach's alpha showed moderate-high values for raters and ROI methods.
conclusionThe study showed that high reproducibility in spinal cord DTI can be achieved, and demonstrated the importance of setting detailed methodology for post-processing DTI data, specifically the placement of ROIs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.