Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34911199›Full record

Trial reportNeuroImage. Clinical2021

Assessing the utility of low resolution brain imaging: treatment of infant hydrocephalus.

Joshua R Harper, Venkateswararao Cherukuri, Tom O'Reilly, Mingzhao Yu, Edith Mbabazi-Kabachelor, Ronald Mulando, Kevin N Sheth, Andrew G Webb, Benjamin C Warf, Abhaya V Kulkarni and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in NeuroImage. Clinical, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Engineering Principles and Bioengineering in Global Health.Neurosurgery clinics of North America · 2024
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Brain imaging with portable low-field MRI.Nature reviews bioengineering · 2023
    Article
  11. 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

12 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Joshua R HarperCenter for Neural Engineering, Department of Engineering Science and Mechanics, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA.
Venkateswararao CherukuriSchool of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA.
Tom O'ReillyGorter Center for High Field MRI, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, NL, the Netherlands.
Mingzhao YuSchool of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA.
Edith Mbabazi-KabachelorThe CURE Children's Hospital of Uganda, Uganda.
Ronald MulandoThe CURE Children's Hospital of Uganda, Uganda.
Kevin N ShethDepartment of Neurology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
Andrew G WebbGorter Center for High Field MRI, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, NL, the Netherlands.
Benjamin C WarfDepartment of Neurosurgery, Boston Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA.
Abhaya V KulkarniDepartment of Surgery, Hospital for Sick Children, University of Toronto, CA, USA.
Vishal MongaSchool of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA.
Steven J SchiffCenter for Neural Engineering, Department of Engineering Science and Mechanics, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA; Departments of Neurosurgery, and Physics, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA. Electronic address: steven.j.schiff@gmail.com.
Pennsylvania State University · USCURE Children’s Hospital of Uganda · UGLeiden University Medical Center · NLBoston Children's Hospital · USYale University · US

Funding

Neurocognitive outcomes and changes in brain and CSF volume after treatment of post-infectious hydrocephalus in Ugandan infants by shunting or ETV/CPC: a randomized prospective trialR01HD085853 · NICHD · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI KULKARNI, ABHAYA V, SCHIFF, STEVEN JOHN · 2015 to 2025
$4.7M
NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD085853
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As low-field MRI technology is being disseminated into clinical settings around the world, it is important to assess the image quality required to properly diagnose and treat a given disease and evaluate the role of machine learning algorithms, such as deep learning, in the enhancement of lower quality images. In this post hoc analysis of an ongoing randomized clinical trial, we assessed the diagnostic utility of reduced-quality and deep learning enhanced images for hydrocephalus treatment planning. CT images of post-infectious infant hydrocephalus were degraded in terms of spatial resolution, noise, and contrast between brain and CSF and enhanced using deep learning algorithms. Both degraded and enhanced images were presented to three experienced pediatric neurosurgeons accustomed to working in low- to middle-income countries (LMIC) for assessment of clinical utility in treatment planning for hydrocephalus. In addition, enhanced images were presented alongside their ground-truth CT counterparts in order to assess whether reconstruction errors caused by the deep learning enhancement routine were acceptable to the evaluators. Results indicate that image resolution and contrast-to-noise ratio between brain and CSF predict the likelihood of an image being characterized as useful for hydrocephalus treatment planning. Deep learning enhancement substantially increases contrast-to-noise ratio improving the apparent likelihood of the image being useful; however, deep learning enhancement introduces structural errors which create a substantial risk of misleading clinical interpretation. We find that images with lower quality than is customarily acceptable can be useful for hydrocephalus treatment planning. Moreover, low quality images may be preferable to images enhanced with deep learning, since they do not introduce the risk of misleading information which could misguide treatment decisions. These findings advocate for new standards in assessing acceptable image quality for clinical use.

Indexed as

Deep LearningHydrocephalusAlgorithmsBrainChildHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedTomography, X-Ray ComputedDeep learningHydrocephalus treatment planningImage qualityLow field MRIRisk assessment

Identifiers

PMID34911199
PMCPMC8646178
OpenAlexW3215244596

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.