Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33542327›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

Classification of paediatric brain tumours by diffusion weighted imaging and machine learning.

Jan Novak, Niloufar Zarinabad, Heather Rose, Theodoros Arvanitis, Lesley MacPherson, Benjamin Pinkey, Adam Oates, Patrick Hales, Richard Grundy, Dorothee Auer and 11 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. The role of machine learning, deep learning, and MRI findings in the classification of pediatric posterior fossa tumors.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. [Pediatric posterior fossa tumors].Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023
    Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

21 authors at 11 institutions in 1 country.

Jan NovakInstitute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, School of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Niloufar ZarinabadInstitute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, School of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Heather RoseInstitute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, School of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Theodoros ArvanitisInstitute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, School of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Lesley MacPhersonRadiology, Birmingham Women's and Children's NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK.
Benjamin PinkeyRadiology, Birmingham Women's and Children's NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK.
Adam OatesRadiology, Birmingham Women's and Children's NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK.
Patrick HalesDevelopmental Imaging & Biophysics Section, UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, London, WC1N 1EH, UK.
Richard GrundyThe Children's Brain Tumour Research Centre, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Dorothee AuerSir Peter Mansfield Imaging Centre, University of Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre, Nottingham, UK.
Daniel Rodriguez GutierrezThe Children's Brain Tumour Research Centre, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Tim JaspanThe Children's Brain Tumour Research Centre, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Shivaram AvulaDepartment of Radiology, Alder Hey Children's Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK.
Laurence AbernethyDepartment of Radiology, Alder Hey Children's Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK.
Ramneek KaurDevelopmental Imaging & Biophysics Section, UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, London, WC1N 1EH, UK.
Darren HargraveHaematology and Oncology Department, Great Ormond Street Children's Hospital, London, UK.
Dipayan MitraThe Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle, UK.
Simon BaileySir James Spence Institute of Child Health, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Nigel DaviesInstitute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, School of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Christopher ClarkDevelopmental Imaging & Biophysics Section, UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, London, WC1N 1EH, UK.
Andrew PeetInstitute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, School of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK. a.peet@bham.ac.uk.
Birmingham Women’s and Children’s NHS Foundation Trust · GBGreat Ormond Street Hospital · GBUniversity of Birmingham · GBUniversity of Nottingham · GBAlder Hey Children's NHS Foundation Trust · GBBrain Tumour Research · GBNewcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBNottingham Biomedical Research Centre · GBRoyal Victoria Infirmary · GBUniversity College London · GBUniversity of Liverpool · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK 10342Department of Health NIHR-RP-02-12-019Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To determine if apparent diffusion coefficients (ADC) can discriminate between posterior fossa brain tumours on a multicentre basis. A total of 124 paediatric patients with posterior fossa tumours (including 55 Medulloblastomas, 36 Pilocytic Astrocytomas and 26 Ependymomas) were scanned using diffusion weighted imaging across 12 different hospitals using a total of 18 different scanners. Apparent diffusion coefficient maps were produced and histogram data was extracted from tumour regions of interest. Total histograms and histogram metrics (mean, variance, skew, kurtosis and 10th, 20th and 50th quantiles) were used as data input for classifiers with accuracy determined by tenfold cross validation. Mean ADC values from the tumour regions of interest differed between tumour types, (ANOVA P < 0.001). A cut off value for mean ADC between Ependymomas and Medulloblastomas was found to be of 0.984 × 10

Indexed as

Machine LearningAdolescentAstrocytomaBrain NeoplasmsCerebellar NeoplasmsChildChild, PreschoolDiffusion Magnetic Resonance ImagingEpendymomaFemaleHumansInfantMaleMedulloblastomaPediatrics

Identifiers

PMID33542327
PMCPMC7862387
OpenAlexW3126934851

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.