Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29074279›Full record

ArticleNeuroImage2018

Histological validation of diffusion MRI fiber orientation distributions and dispersion.

Kurt G Schilling, Vaibhav Janve, Yurui Gao, Iwona Stepniewska, Bennett A Landman, Adam W Anderson

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in NeuroImage, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 145 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
145citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
14.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

145 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 218 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Gray Matter Microstructure Measured Using Diffusion Imaging as a Biomarker of Severity in Lewy Body Diseases.Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. DeepFixel: Crossing white matter fiber identification through spherical convolutional neural networks.Proceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

85 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kurt G SchillingVanderbilt University Institute of Imaging Science, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA; Department of Biomedical Engineering, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA. Electronic address: kurt.g.schilling@vanderbilt.edu.
Vaibhav JanveVanderbilt University Institute of Imaging Science, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA; Department of Biomedical Engineering, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.
Yurui GaoVanderbilt University Institute of Imaging Science, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA; Department of Biomedical Engineering, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.
Iwona StepniewskaDepartment of Psychology, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.
Bennett A LandmanVanderbilt University Institute of Imaging Science, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA; Department of Biomedical Engineering, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA; Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, United States; Department of Electrical Engineering, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.
Adam W AndersonVanderbilt University Institute of Imaging Science, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA; Department of Biomedical Engineering, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA; Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, United States.
Vanderbilt University · US

Funding

Research Project: Sensory and Multisensory Contributions to AutismU54HD083211 · NICHD · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI DYKENS, ELISABETH MAY · 2015 to 2019
$7.1M
Postdoctoral Training in Biomedical MRI and MRST32EB001628 · NIBIB · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI John C Gore · 2003 to 2026
$7.0M
The Biological Basis of Diffusion MRI of the BrainR01NS058639 · NINDS · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI ANDERSON, ADAM W · 2008 to 2016
$3.7M
LSM880-Airyscan Confocal Microscope for Large Shared ResourceS10OD021630 · OD · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI WELLS, K. SAM · 2016 to 2016
$560k
NIBIB NIH HHS T32 EB001628NICHD NIH HHS U54 HD083211NIH HHS S10 OD021630NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS058639
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging (dMRI) is widely used to probe tissue microstructure, and is currently the only non-invasive way to measure the brain's fiber architecture. While a large number of approaches to recover the intra-voxel fiber structure have been utilized in the scientific community, a direct, 3D, quantitative validation of these methods against relevant histological fiber geometries is lacking. In this study, we investigate how well different high angular resolution diffusion imaging (HARDI) models and reconstruction methods predict the ground-truth histologically defined fiber orientation distribution (FOD), as well as investigate their behavior over a range of physical and experimental conditions. The dMRI methods tested include constrained spherical deconvolution (CSD), Q-ball imaging (QBI), diffusion orientation transform (DOT), persistent angular structure (PAS), and neurite orientation dispersion and density imaging (NODDI) methods. Evaluation criteria focus on overall agreement in FOD shape, correct assessment of the number of fiber populations, and angular accuracy in orientation. In addition, we make comparisons of the histological orientation dispersion with the fiber spread determined from the dMRI methods. As a general result, no HARDI method outperformed others in all quality criteria, with many showing tradeoffs in reconstruction accuracy. All reconstruction techniques describe the overall continuous angular structure of the histological FOD quite well, with good to moderate correlation (median angular correlation coefficient > 0.70) in both single- and multiple-fiber voxels. However, no method is consistently successful at extracting discrete measures of the number and orientations of FOD peaks. The major inaccuracies of all techniques tend to be in extracting local maxima of the FOD, resulting in either false positive or false negative peaks. Median angular errors are ∼10° for the primary fiber direction and ∼20° for the secondary fiber, if present. For most methods, these results did not vary strongly over a wide range of acquisition parameters (number of diffusion weighting directions and b value). Regardless of acquisition parameters, all methods show improved successes at resolving multiple fiber compartments in a voxel when fiber populations cross at near-orthogonal angles, with no method adequately capturing low to moderate angle (<60°) crossing fibers. Finally, most methods are limited in their ability to capture orientation dispersion, resulting in low to moderate, yet statistically significant, correlation with histologically-derived dispersion with both HARDI and NODDI methodologies. Together, these results provide quantitative measures of the reliability and limitations of dMRI reconstruction methods and can be used to identify relative advantages of competing approaches as well as potential strategies for improving accuracy.

Indexed as

AnimalsBrainDiffusion Magnetic Resonance ImagingDiffusion Tensor ImagingImage Processing, Computer-AssistedImaging, Three-DimensionalNerve FibersNeuroimagingSaimiriDiffusion magnetic resonance imagingDispersionFiber orientation distributionHARDIHistologyReconstructionValidation

Identifiers

PMID29074279
PMCPMC5732036
OpenAlexW2765999949

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.