Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33462642›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology experimental2021

MRI texture feature repeatability and image acquisition factor robustness, a phantom study and in silico study.

Joshua Shur, Matthew Blackledge, James D'Arcy, David J Collins, Maria Bali, Martin O'Leach, Dow-Mu Koh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology experimental, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

7 authors.

Joshua ShurDepartment of Radiology, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Downs Road, Sutton, London, Surrey, SM2 5PT, UK.
Matthew BlackledgeCRUK Cancer Imaging Centre, The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
James D'ArcyCRUK Cancer Imaging Centre, The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
David J CollinsCRUK Cancer Imaging Centre, The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Maria BaliDepartment of Radiology, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Downs Road, Sutton, London, Surrey, SM2 5PT, UK.
Martin O'LeachCRUK Cancer Imaging Centre, The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Dow-Mu KohDepartment of Radiology, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Downs Road, Sutton, London, Surrey, SM2 5PT, UK. Dow-mu.koh@icr.ac.uk.

Funding

Cancer Research UK C1060/A10334Cancer Research UK C1060/A16464Department of Health
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo evaluate robustness and repeatability of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) texture features in water and tissue phantom test-retest study. MATERIALS AND

methodsSeparate water and tissue phantoms were imaged twice with the same protocol in a test-retest experiment using a 1.5-T scanner. Protocols were acquired to favour signal-to-noise ratio and resolution. Forty-six features including first order statistics and second-order texture features were extracted, and repeatability was assessed by calculating the concordance correlation coefficient. Separately, base image noise and resolution were manipulated in an in silico experiment, and robustness of features was calculated by assessing percentage coefficient of variation and linear correlation of features with noise and resolution. These simulation data were compared with the acquired data. Features were classified by their degree (high, intermediate, or low) of robustness and repeatability.

resultsEighty percent of the MRI features were repeatable (concordance correlation coefficient > 0.9) in the phantom test-retest experiment. The majority (approximately 90%) demonstrated a strong or intermediate correlation with image acquisition parameter, and 19/46 (41%) and 13/46 (28%) of features were highly robust to noise and resolution, respectively (coefficient of variation < 5%). Agreement between the acquired and simulation data varied, with the range of agreement within feature classes between 11 and 92%.

conclusionMost MRI features were repeatable in a phantom test-retest study. This phantom data may serve as a lower limit of feature MRI repeatability. Robustness of features varies with acquisition parameter, and appropriate features can be selected for clinical validation studies.

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingPhantoms, ImagingSignal-To-Noise RatioMagnetic resonance imagingPhantoms (imaging)RadiomicsReproducibility of resultsTexture analysis

Identifiers

PMID33462642
PMCPMC7813908

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.