ArticleNeuroradiology2022
Clinical adaptation of synthetic MRI-based whole brain volume segmentation in children at 3 T: comparison with modified SPM segmentation methods.
Article in Neuroradiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Technical aspects and clinical applications of synthetic MRI: a scoping review.Diagnosis (Berlin, Germany) · 2025Article
- Article
- Accelerated Synthetic MRI with Deep Learning-Based Reconstruction for Pediatric Neuroimaging.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo validate the use of synthetic magnetic resonance imaging (SyMRI) volumetry by comparing with child-optimized SPM 12 volumetry in 3 T pediatric neuroimaging.
methodsIn total, 106 children aged 4.7-18.7 years who underwent both synthetic and 3D T1-weighted imaging and had no abnormal imaging/neurologic findings were included for the SyMRI vs. SPM T1-only segmentation (SPM T1). Forty of the 106 children who underwent an additional 3D T2-weighted imaging were included for the SyMRI vs. SPM multispectral segmentation (SPM multi). SPM segmentation using an age-appropriate atlas and inverse-transforming template-space intracranial mask was compared with SyMRI segmentation. Volume differences between SyMRI and SPM T1 were plotted against age to evaluate the influence of age on volume difference.
resultsMeasurements derived from SyMRI and two SPM methods showed excellent agreements and strong correlations except for the CSF volume (CSFV) (intraclass correlation coefficients = 0.87-0.98; r = 0.78-0.96; relative volume difference other than CSFV = 6.8-18.5% [SyMRI vs. SPM T1] and 11.3-22.7% [SyMRI vs. SPM multi]). Dice coefficients of all brain tissues (except CSF) were in the range 0.78-0.91. The Bland-Altman plot and age-related volume difference change suggested that the volume differences between the two methods were influenced by the volume of each brain tissue and subject's age (p < 0.05).
conclusionSyMRI and SPM segmentation results were consistent except for CSFV, which supports routine clinical use of SyMRI-based volumetry in pediatric neuroimaging. However, caution should be taken in the interpretation of the CSF segmentation results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.