ArticleNeuroImage2021
Registration quality filtering improves robustness of voxel-wise analyses to the choice of brain template.
Article in NeuroImage, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Tumor-conditioned inter-patient registration using planning computed tomography for voxel-based analysis to predict radiation pneumonitis in lung cancer patients.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Tumor aware recurrent inter-patient deformable image registration of computed tomography scans with lung cancer.Medical physics · 2025Article
- Probabilistic Presurgical Language fMRI Atlas of Patients with Brain Tumors.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
motivationMany clinical and scientific conclusions that rely on voxel-wise analyses of neuroimaging depend on the accurate comparison of corresponding anatomical regions. Such comparisons are made possible by registration of the images of subjects of interest onto a common brain template, such as the Johns Hopkins University (JHU) template. However, current image registration algorithms are prone to errors that are distributed in a template-dependent manner. Therefore, the results of voxel-wise analyses can be sensitive to template choice. Despite this problem, the issue of appropriate template choice for voxel-wise analyses is not generally addressed in contemporary neuroimaging studies, which may lead to the reporting of spurious results.
resultsWe present a novel approach to determine the suitability of a brain template for voxel-wise analysis. The approach is based on computing a "distance" between automatically-generated atlases of the subjects of interest and templates that is indicative of the extent of subject-to-template registration errors. This allows for the filtering of subjects and candidate templates based on a quantitative measure of registration quality. We benchmark our approach by evaluating alternative templates for a voxel-wise analysis that reproduces the well-known decline in fractional anisotropy (FA) with age. Our results show that filtering registrations minimizes errors and decreases the sensitivity of voxel-wise analysis to template choice. In addition to carrying important implications for future neuroimaging studies, the developed framework of template induction can be used to evaluate robustness of data analysis methods to template choice.
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.