ArticleNeuroImage2020
Accurate and robust whole-head segmentation from magnetic resonance images for individualized head modeling.
Article in NeuroImage, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 110 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
110 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Outcome measures for electric field modeling in tES and TMS: A systematic review and large-scale modeling study.NeuroImage · 2023Pooled it
- Intact embodiment during perspective-taking in older adults is not affected by focal tDCS.GeroScience · 2025Trial
- A patient-specific, 3D printed neurostimulator enabling focal transcranial electrical stimulation and EEG at home.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2025Trial
- Investigating the effects of brain stimulation on the neural substrates of inhibition in patients with OCD: A simultaneous tDCS - fMRI study.Translational psychiatry · 2025Trial
- Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Auditory Verbal Hallucinations in Schizophrenia: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2024Trial
- Multisession tDCS combined with intrastimulation training improves emotion recognition in adolescents with autism spectrum disorder.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2024Trial
- tDCS-enhanced cognitive training improves attention and alters connectivity in control and somatomotor networks: A triple blind study.NeuroImage · 2024Trial
- Electric field simulation and appropriate electrode positioning for optimized transcranial direct current stimulation of stroke patients: an in Silico model.Scientific reports · 2024Trial
- Cognitive training and brain stimulation in patients with cognitive impairment: a randomized controlled trial.Alzheimer's research & therapy · 2024Trial
- Multichannel anodal tDCS over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in a paediatric population.Scientific reports · 2021Trial
- Direction-Dependent Effects of White-Matter Conductivity Anisotropy on Modulation Depth and Spatial Extent in Transcranial Interference Stimulation: A Simulation Study.Brain topography · 2026Article
- MindGrab: A spectrally-motivated architecture for accessible deep learning in neuroimaging.NeuroImage · 2026Article
- 2 mA is NOT 2 mA: Electric field variability in high-definition tDCS and its implications for precision neuromodulation in aging.Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026Article
- Mechanisms associated with tDCS as an adjuvant to shortened phonomotor treatment in chronic post-stroke aphasia.Neuroimage. Reports · 2026Article
- Impact of brain anisotropy on transcranial temporal interference stimulation: numerical analysis toward reliable montage optimization.Biomedical engineering letters · 2026Article
- Histologically Informed Multiscale Modeling of the Neuronal Elements Activated by TMS.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- How Standardized Is Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Treatment for Depression? Large-Cohort Modeling Reveals Systematic Dosimetric Variability.Psychotherapy and psychosomatics · 2026Article
- Bifocal Beta-frequency Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation Enhances Somatosensory Spatial Discrimination.Brain topography · 2026Article
- The optimization of neuroprosthetic interfaces relying on biophysical and surrogate digital twins.npj biomedical innovations · 2026Review
- Low intensity transcranial electric stimulation: Safety, ethical, legal regulatory and application guidelines (2017-2025: An update) - endorsed by the European Society for Brain Stimulation (ESBS) and by the International Federation for Clinical Neurophysiology (IFCN).Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026Review
50 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Transcranial brain stimulation (TBS) has been established as a method for modulating and mapping the function of the human brain, and as a potential treatment tool in several brain disorders. Typically, the stimulation is applied using a one-size-fits-all approach with predetermined locations for the electrodes, in electric stimulation (TES), or the coil, in magnetic stimulation (TMS), which disregards anatomical variability between individuals. However, the induced electric field distribution in the head largely depends on anatomical features implying the need for individually tailored stimulation protocols for focal dosing. This requires detailed models of the individual head anatomy, combined with electric field simulations, to find an optimal stimulation protocol for a given cortical target. Considering the anatomical and functional complexity of different brain disorders and pathologies, it is crucial to account for the anatomical variability in order to translate TBS from a research tool into a viable option for treatment. In this article we present a new method, called CHARM, for automated segmentation of fifteen different head tissues from magnetic resonance (MR) scans. The new method compares favorably to two freely available software tools on a five-tissue segmentation task, while obtaining reasonable segmentation accuracy over all fifteen tissues. The method automatically adapts to variability in the input scans and can thus be directly applied to clinical or research scans acquired with different scanners, sequences or settings. We show that an increase in automated segmentation accuracy results in a lower relative error in electric field simulations when compared to anatomical head models constructed from reference segmentations. However, also the improved segmentations and, by implication, the electric field simulations are affected by systematic artifacts in the input MR scans. As long as the artifacts are unaccounted for, this can lead to local simulation differences up to 30% of the peak field strength on reference simulations. Finally, we exemplarily demonstrate the effect of including all fifteen tissue classes in the field simulations against the standard approach of using only five tissue classes and show that for specific stimulation configurations the local differences can reach 10% of the peak field strength.
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.