Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31675165›Full record

ArticleHippocampus2020

Characterization of hippocampal subfields using ex vivo MRI and histology data: Lessons for in vivo segmentation.

Robin de Flores, David Berron, Song-Lin Ding, Ranjit Ittyerah, John B Pluta, Long Xie, Daniel H Adler, John L Robinson, Theresa Schuck, John Q Trojanowski and 7 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Hippocampus, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

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

17 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Robin de FloresDepartment of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.ORCID 0000-0003-3953-3392
David BerronClinical Sciences Malmö, Clinical Memory Research Unit, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Song-Lin DingAllen Institute for Brain Science, Seattle, Washington.
Ranjit IttyerahDepartment of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
John B PlutaDepartment of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Long XieDepartment of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.ORCID 0000-0002-7184-7028
Daniel H AdlerDepartment of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
John L RobinsonCenter for Neurodegenerative Disease Research, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Theresa SchuckCenter for Neurodegenerative Disease Research, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
John Q TrojanowskiCenter for Neurodegenerative Disease Research, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Murray GrossmanDepartment of Neurology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Weixia LiuDepartment of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Stephen PickupDepartment of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Sandhitsu R DasDepartment of Neurology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
David A WolkDepartment of Neurology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Paul A YushkevichDepartment of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Laura E M WisseDepartment of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
University of Pennsylvania · USPenn Center for AIDS Research · USInstitute for Neurodegenerative Disorders · USAllen Institute for Brain Science · USLund University · SE

Funding

Transgenic Mouse Models of Tau PathologiesP01AG017586 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI LEE, VIRGINIA M · 2000 to 2021
$37.3M
UPenn ADCC Biomarker CoreP30AG010124 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI XIE, SHARON XIANGWEN · 1991 to 2020
$35.1M
Understanding Environmental Contributions to Heterogeneity in bvFTD.P01AG066597 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI David John Irwin, Corey T McMillan · 2020 to 2026
$18.8M
Ex Vivo Imaging of the Aging Brain to Discover Morphology/Pathology AssociationsR01AG056014 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI Paul A. Yushkevich · 2017 to 2026
$4.5M
Modulators of Medial Temporal Lobe Subregion Structure and Function in Normal and Pathological AgingR01AG055005 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI WOLK, DAVID A · 2017 to 2021
$3.3M
NIA NIH HHS P01 AG017586NIA NIH HHS P01 AG066597NIA NIH HHS P30 AG010124NIA NIH HHS R01 AG055005NIA NIH HHS R01 AG056014
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Hippocampal subfield segmentation on in vivo MRI is of great interest for cognition, aging, and disease research. Extant subfield segmentation protocols have been based on neuroanatomical references, but these references often give limited information on anatomical variability. Moreover, there is generally a mismatch between the orientation of the histological sections and the often anisotropic coronal sections on in vivo MRI. To address these issues, we provide a detailed description of hippocampal anatomy using a postmortem dataset containing nine specimens of subjects with and without dementia, which underwent a 9.4 T MRI and histological processing. Postmortem MRI matched the typical orientation of in vivo images and segmentations were generated in MRI space, based on the registered annotated histological sections. We focus on the following topics: the order of appearance of subfields, the location of subfields relative to macroanatomical features, the location of subfields in the uncus and tail and the composition of the dark band, a hypointense layer visible in T2-weighted MRI. Our main findings are that: (a) there is a consistent order of appearance of subfields in the hippocampal head, (b) the composition of subfields is not consistent in the anterior uncus, but more consistent in the posterior uncus, (c) the dark band consists only of the CA-stratum lacunosum moleculare, not the strata moleculare of the dentate gyrus, (d) the subiculum/CA1 border is located at the middle of the width of the hippocampus in the body in coronal plane, but moves in a medial direction from anterior to posterior, and (e) the variable location and composition of subfields in the hippocampal tail can be brought back to a body-like appearance when reslicing the MRI scan following the curvature of the tail. Our findings and this publicly available dataset will hopefully improve anatomical accuracy of future hippocampal subfield segmentation protocols.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overDatabases, FactualFemaleHippocampusHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle Agedex vivohippocampal subfieldshistologyin vivoMRIsegmentation

Identifiers

PMID31675165
PMCPMC7192771
OpenAlexW2982717240

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.