Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26923370›Full record

ArticleNeuroImage2016

Removing inter-subject technical variability in magnetic resonance imaging studies.

Jean-Philippe Fortin, Elizabeth M Sweeney, John Muschelli, Ciprian M Crainiceanu, Russell T Shinohara, Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NeuroImage, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 84 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
84citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

24 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors.

Jean-Philippe FortinDepartment of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Elizabeth M SweeneyDepartment of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
John MuschelliDepartment of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Ciprian M CrainiceanuDepartment of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Russell T ShinoharaDepartment of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Electronic address: rshi@upenn.edu.
Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative

Funding

EPIDEMIOLOGY AND BIOSTATISTICS OF AGINGT32AG000247 · NIA · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI Karen J. Bandeen-Roche · 1996 to 2026
$13.2M
Adaptive Large-Scale Framework for Automatic Biomedical Image SegmentationR01EB017255 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI YUSHKEVICH, PAUL A. · 2014 to 2018
$3.0M
Statistical methods for large and complex databases of ultra-high-dimensionalR01NS085211 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI SHINOHARA, RUSSELL TAKESHI · 2013 to 2017
$1.8M
Spatiotemporal Modeling of MRI Brain Lesion Trajectories of Biomarker DiscoveryR21NS093349 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI ELOYAN, ANI, SHINOHARA, RUSSELL TAKESHI · 2016 to 2017
$454k
NIA NIH HHS T32 AG000247NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB017255NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS085211NINDS NIH HHS R21 NS093349
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) intensities are acquired in arbitrary units, making scans non-comparable across sites and between subjects. Intensity normalization is a first step for the improvement of comparability of the images across subjects. However, we show that unwanted inter-scan variability associated with imaging site, scanner effect, and other technical artifacts is still present after standard intensity normalization in large multi-site neuroimaging studies. We propose RAVEL (Removal of Artificial Voxel Effect by Linear regression), a tool to remove residual technical variability after intensity normalization. As proposed by SVA and RUV [Leek and Storey, 2007, 2008, Gagnon-Bartsch and Speed, 2012], two batch effect correction tools largely used in genomics, we decompose the voxel intensities of images registered to a template into a biological component and an unwanted variation component. The unwanted variation component is estimated from a control region obtained from the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), where intensities are known to be unassociated with disease status and other clinical covariates. We perform a singular value decomposition (SVD) of the control voxels to estimate factors of unwanted variation. We then estimate the unwanted factors using linear regression for every voxel of the brain and take the residuals as the RAVEL-corrected intensities. We assess the performance of RAVEL using T1-weighted (T1-w) images from more than 900 subjects with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI), as well as healthy controls from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) database. We compare RAVEL to two intensity-normalization-only methods: histogram matching and White Stripe. We show that RAVEL performs best at improving the replicability of the brain regions that are empirically found to be most associated with AD, and that these regions are significantly more present in structures impacted by AD (hippocampus, amygdala, parahippocampal gyrus, enthorinal area, and fornix stria terminals). In addition, we show that the RAVEL-corrected intensities have the best performance in distinguishing between MCI subjects and healthy subjects using the mean hippocampal intensity (AUC=67%), a marked improvement compared to results from intensity normalization alone (AUC=63% and 59% for histogram matching and White Stripe, respectively). RAVEL is promising for many other imaging modalities.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsAlzheimer DiseaseArtifactsBrainFemaleHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedLinear ModelsMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleNeuroimagingReproducibility of ResultsROC CurveSignal Processing, Computer-AssistedADNIAlzheimer's diseaseMRINormalizationScan effect

Identifiers

PMID26923370
PMCPMC5540379

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.