Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34201012›Full record

ArticleTomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.)2021

Stability of Radiomic Features across Different Region of Interest Sizes-A CT and MR Phantom Study.

Laura J Jensen, Damon Kim, Thomas Elgeti, Ingo G Steffen, Bernd Hamm, Sebastian N Nagel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

6 authors.

Laura J JensenDepartment of Radiology, Corporate Member of Freie Universität and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203 Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-6436-5733
Damon KimDepartment of Radiology, Corporate Member of Freie Universität and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203 Berlin, Germany.
Thomas ElgetiDepartment of Radiology, Corporate Member of Freie Universität and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203 Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-7155-6044
Ingo G SteffenDepartment of Radiology, Corporate Member of Freie Universität and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203 Berlin, Germany.
Bernd HammDepartment of Radiology, Corporate Member of Freie Universität and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203 Berlin, Germany.
Sebastian N NagelDepartment of Radiology, Corporate Member of Freie Universität and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203 Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-9489-2913

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We aimed to evaluate radiomic features' stability across different region of interest (ROI) sizes in CT and MR images. We chose a phantom with a homogenous internal structure so no differences for a feature extracted from ROIs of different sizes would be expected. For this, we scanned a plastic cup filled with sodium chloride solution ten times in CT and per MR sequence (T1-weighted-gradient-echo and T2-weighted-turbo-inversion-recovery-magnitude). We placed sphere-shaped ROIs of different diameters (4, 8, and 16 mm, and 4, 8, and 16 pixels) into the phantom's center. Features were extracted using PyRadiomics. We assessed feature stability across ROI sizes with overall concordance correlation coefficients (OCCCs). Differences were tested for significance with the Mann-Whitney U-test. Of 93 features, 87 T1w-derived, 87 TIRM-derived, and 70 CT-derived features were significantly different between ROI sizes. Among MR-derived features, OCCCs showed excellent (>0.90) agreement for mean, median, and root mean squared for ROI sizes between 4 and 16 mm and pixels. We further observed excellent agreement for 10th and 90th percentile in T1w and 10th percentile in T2w TIRM images. There was no excellent agreement among the OCCCs of CT-derived features. In summary, many features indicated significant differences and only few showed excellent agreement across varying ROI sizes, although we examined a homogenous phantom. Since we considered a small phantom in an experimental setting, further studies to investigate this size effect would be necessary for a generalization. Nevertheless, we believe knowledge about this effect is crucial in interpreting radiomics studies, as features that supposedly discriminate disease entities may only indicate a systematic difference in ROI size.

Indexed as

Generalization, PsychologicalMagnetic Resonance ImagingPhantoms, ImagingStatistics, NonparametricTomography, X-Ray Computedcomputed tomographymagnetic resonance imagingphantomradiomicsreproducibilityrobustnesstexture analysis

Identifiers

PMID34201012
PMCPMC8293351

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.