Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34454295›Full record

ArticleMedical image analysis2021

Comparison of domain adaptation techniques for white matter hyperintensity segmentation in brain MR images.

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

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 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. 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

6 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: vaanathi.sundaresan@ndcn.ox.ac.uk.
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, Università di Modena e Reggio Emilia, Italy.
Nicola K DinsdaleWellcome 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.
Peter M RothwellCentre for Prevention of Stroke and Dementia, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, UK.
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.
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; South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute (SAHMRI), Adelaide, Australia.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/L023784/2Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Robust automated segmentation of white matter hyperintensities (WMHs) in different datasets (domains) is highly challenging due to differences in acquisition (scanner, sequence), population (WMH amount and location) and limited availability of manual segmentations to train supervised algorithms. In this work we explore various domain adaptation techniques such as transfer learning and domain adversarial learning methods, including domain adversarial neural networks and domain unlearning, to improve the generalisability of our recently proposed triplanar ensemble network, which is our baseline model. We used datasets with variations in intensity profile, lesion characteristics and acquired using different scanners. For the source domain, we considered a dataset consisting of data acquired from 3 different scanners, while the target domain consisted of 2 datasets. We evaluated the domain adaptation techniques on the target domain datasets, and additionally evaluated the performance on the source domain test dataset for the adversarial techniques. For transfer learning, we also studied various training options such as minimal number of unfrozen layers and subjects required for fine-tuning in the target domain. On comparing the performance of different techniques on the target dataset, domain adversarial training of neural network gave the best performance, making the technique promising for robust WMH segmentation.

Indexed as

White MatterAlgorithmsBrainHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMagnetic Resonance ImagingNeural Networks, ComputerDeep learningDomain adaptationSegmentationWhite matter hyperintensities

Identifiers

PMID34454295
PMCPMC8573594

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.