ArticleMagnetic resonance in medicine2018
Empirical single sample quantification of bias and variance in Q-ball imaging.
Article in Magnetic resonance in medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A deep learning approach to estimation of subject-level bias and variance in high angular resolution diffusion imaging.Magnetic resonance imaging · 2019Article
- Evaluation of inter-site bias and variance in diffusion-weighted MRI.Proceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe bias and variance of high angular resolution diffusion imaging methods have not been thoroughly explored in the literature and may benefit from the simulation extrapolation (SIMEX) and bootstrap techniques to estimate bias and variance of high angular resolution diffusion imaging metrics.
methodsThe SIMEX approach is well established in the statistics literature and uses simulation of increasingly noisy data to extrapolate back to a hypothetical case with no noise. The bias of calculated metrics can then be computed by subtracting the SIMEX estimate from the original pointwise measurement. The SIMEX technique has been studied in the context of diffusion imaging to accurately capture the bias in fractional anisotropy measurements in DTI. Herein, we extend the application of SIMEX and bootstrap approaches to characterize bias and variance in metrics obtained from a Q-ball imaging reconstruction of high angular resolution diffusion imaging data.
resultsThe results demonstrate that SIMEX and bootstrap approaches provide consistent estimates of the bias and variance of generalized fractional anisotropy, respectively. The RMSE for the generalized fractional anisotropy estimates shows a 7% decrease in white matter and an 8% decrease in gray matter when compared with the observed generalized fractional anisotropy estimates. On average, the bootstrap technique results in SD estimates that are approximately 97% of the true variation in white matter, and 86% in gray matter.
conclusionBoth SIMEX and bootstrap methods are flexible, estimate population characteristics based on single scans, and may be extended for bias and variance estimation on a variety of high angular resolution diffusion imaging metrics.
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.