Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34325148›Full record

ArticleMedical image analysis2021

Triplanar ensemble U-Net model for white matter hyperintensities segmentation on MR images.

Vaanathi Sundaresan, Giovanna Zamboni, Peter M Rothwell, Mark Jenkinson, Ludovica Griffanti

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical image analysis, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Cerebral small vessel disease lesion segmentation methods: A systematic review.Cerebral circulation - cognition and behavior · 2025
    Review
  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

5 authors.

Vaanathi SundaresanWellcome Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging, Oxford Centre for Functional MRI of the Brain, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, UK; Oxford-Nottingham Centre for Doctoral Training in Biomedical Imaging, University of Oxford, UK; Oxford India Centre for Sustainable Development, Somerville College, University of Oxford, UK. Electronic address: https://www.ndcn.ox.ac.uk/team/vaanathi-sundaresan.
Giovanna ZamboniWellcome Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging, Oxford Centre for Functional MRI of the Brain, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, UK; Centre for Prevention of Stroke and Dementia, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, UK; Dipartimento di Scienze Biomediche, Metaboliche e Neuroscienze, Universitá di Modena e Reggio Emilia, Italy.
Peter M RothwellCentre for Prevention of Stroke and Dementia, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, UK.
Mark JenkinsonWellcome Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging, Oxford Centre for Functional MRI of the Brain, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, UK; Australian Institute for Machine Learning (AIML), School of Computer Science, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia.
Ludovica GriffantiWellcome Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging, Oxford Centre for Functional MRI of the Brain, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, UK; Wellcome Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging, Oxford Centre for Human Brain Activity, Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

Funding

Department of HealthMedical Research Council MR/L023784/2Melanoma Research Alliance EP/L016052/1Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 203139/Z/16/ZWellcome Trust 203141/Z/16/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

White matter hyperintensities (WMHs) have been associated with various cerebrovascular and neurodegenerative diseases. Reliable quantification of WMHs is essential for understanding their clinical impact in normal and pathological populations. Automated segmentation of WMHs is highly challenging due to heterogeneity in WMH characteristics between deep and periventricular white matter, presence of artefacts and differences in the pathology and demographics of populations. In this work, we propose an ensemble triplanar network that combines the predictions from three different planes of brain MR images to provide an accurate WMH segmentation. In the loss functions the network uses anatomical information regarding WMH spatial distribution in loss functions, to improve the efficiency of segmentation and to overcome the contrast variations between deep and periventricular WMHs. We evaluated our method on 5 datasets, of which 3 are part of a publicly available dataset (training data for MICCAI WMH Segmentation Challenge 2017 - MWSC 2017) consisting of subjects from three different cohorts, and we also submitted our method to MWSC 2017 to be evaluated on the unseen test datasets. On evaluating our method separately in deep and periventricular regions, we observed robust and comparable performance in both regions. Our method performed better than most of the existing methods, including FSL BIANCA, and on par with the top ranking deep learning methods of MWSC 2017.

Indexed as

White MatterArtifactsBrainHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingDeep learningMRISegmentationU-NetsWhite matter hyperintensities

Identifiers

PMID34325148
PMCPMC8505759

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.