Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32390814›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2020

Investigating the Added Value of FreeSurfer's Manual Editing Procedure for the Study of the Reading Network in a Pediatric Population.

Caroline Beelen, Thanh Vân Phan, Jan Wouters, Pol Ghesquière, Maaike Vandermosten

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Elucidation of Brain Morphogenesis Using Quantitative Brain Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Children.Pediatrics international : official journal of the Japan Pediatric Society
    Review
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

5 authors.

Caroline BeelenParenting and Special Education Research Unit, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Thanh Vân PhanIcometrix Company, Leuven, Belgium.
Jan WoutersResearch Group ExpORL, Department of Neuroscience, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Pol GhesquièreParenting and Special Education Research Unit, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Maaike VandermostenResearch Group ExpORL, Department of Neuroscience, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Insights into brain anatomy are important for the early detection of neurodevelopmental disorders, such as dyslexia. FreeSurfer is one of the most frequently applied automatized software tools to study brain morphology. However, quality control of the outcomes provided by FreeSurfer is often ignored and could lead to wrong statistical inferences. Additional manual editing of the data may be a solution, although not without a cost in time and resources. Past research in adults on comparing the automatized method of FreeSurfer with and without additional manual editing indicated that although editing may lead to significant differences in morphological measures between the methods in some regions, it does not substantially change the sensitivity to detect clinical differences. Given that automated approaches are more likely to fail in pediatric-and inherently more noisy-data, we investigated in the current study whether FreeSurfer can be applied fully automatically or additional manual edits of T1-images are needed in a pediatric sample. Specifically, cortical thickness and surface area measures with and without additional manual edits were compared in six regions of interest (ROIs) of the reading network in 5-to-6-year-old children with and without dyslexia. Results revealed that additional editing leads to statistical differences in the morphological measures, but that these differences are consistent across subjects and that the sensitivity to reveal statistical differences in the morphological measures between children with and without dyslexia is not affected, even though conclusions of marginally significant findings can differ depending on the method used. Thereby, our results indicate that additional manual editing of reading-related regions in FreeSurfer has limited gain for pediatric samples.

Indexed as

automated processingdevelopmental neuroimagingFreeSurfermanual editingpediatric T1-weighted imagesreading network

Identifiers

PMID32390814
PMCPMC7194167

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.