Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34381348›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neuroinformatics2021

A Simulation Toolkit for Testing the Sensitivity and Accuracy of Corticometry Pipelines.

Mona OmidYeganeh, Najmeh Khalili-Mahani, Patrick Bermudez, Alison Ross, Claude Lepage, Robert D Vincent, S Jeon, Lindsay B Lewis, S Das, Alex P Zijdenbos and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neuroinformatics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

14 authors.

Mona OmidYeganehMcGill Centre for Integrative Neuroscience, Montreal Neurological Institute, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Najmeh Khalili-MahaniMcGill Centre for Integrative Neuroscience, Montreal Neurological Institute, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Patrick BermudezMcGill Centre for Integrative Neuroscience, Montreal Neurological Institute, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Alison RossMcGill Centre for Integrative Neuroscience, Montreal Neurological Institute, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Claude LepageMcGill Centre for Integrative Neuroscience, Montreal Neurological Institute, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Robert D VincentMcGill Centre for Integrative Neuroscience, Montreal Neurological Institute, Montreal, QC, Canada.
S JeonMcGill Centre for Integrative Neuroscience, Montreal Neurological Institute, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Lindsay B LewisMcGill Centre for Integrative Neuroscience, Montreal Neurological Institute, Montreal, QC, Canada.
S DasMcGill Centre for Integrative Neuroscience, Montreal Neurological Institute, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Alex P ZijdenbosMcGill Centre for Integrative Neuroscience, Montreal Neurological Institute, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Pierre RiouxMcGill Centre for Integrative Neuroscience, Montreal Neurological Institute, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Reza AdalatMcGill Centre for Integrative Neuroscience, Montreal Neurological Institute, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Matthijs C Van EedeSick Kids Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Alan C EvansMcGill Centre for Integrative Neuroscience, Montreal Neurological Institute, Montreal, QC, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years, the replicability of neuroimaging findings has become an important concern to the research community. Neuroimaging pipelines consist of myriad numerical procedures, which can have a cumulative effect on the accuracy of findings. To address this problem, we propose a method for simulating artificial lesions in the brain in order to estimate the sensitivity and specificity of lesion detection, using different automated corticometry pipelines. We have applied this method to different versions of two widely used neuroimaging pipelines (CIVET and FreeSurfer), in terms of coefficients of variation; sensitivity and specificity of detecting lesions in 4 different regions of interest in the cortex, while introducing variations to the lesion size, the blurring kernel used prior to statistical analyses, and different thickness metrics (in CIVET). These variations are tested in a between-subject design (in two random groups, with and without lesions, using T1-weigted MRIs of 152 individuals from the International Consortium of Brain Mapping (ICBM) dataset) and in a within-subject pre-/post-lesion design [using 21 T1-Weighted MRIs of a single adult individual, scanned in the Infant Brain Imaging Study (IBIS)]. The simulation method is sensitive to partial volume effect and lesion size. Comparisons between pipelines illustrate the ability of this method to uncover differences in sensitivity and specificity of lesion detection. We propose that this method be adopted in the workflow of software development and release.

Indexed as

brain morphometrycortical thicknesslesion simulationpipeline accuracyreproducible neuroimagingstatistical parametric mapping

Identifiers

PMID34381348
PMCPMC8350777

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.