Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35095400›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in neuroscience2021

Potential Pitfalls of Using Fractional Anisotropy, Axial Diffusivity, and Radial Diffusivity as Biomarkers of Cerebral White Matter Microstructure.

Chase R Figley, Md Nasir Uddin, Kaihim Wong, Jennifer Kornelsen, Josep Puig, Teresa D Figley

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 160 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
160citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
28.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

160 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 209 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Creativity: a (white) matter of connectivity.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2026
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

100 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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 at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Chase R FigleyDepartment of Radiology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.
Md Nasir UddinDepartment of Radiology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.
Kaihim WongDepartment of Radiology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.
Jennifer KornelsenDepartment of Radiology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.
Josep PuigDepartment of Radiology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.
Teresa D FigleyDepartment of Radiology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.
Health Sciences Centre · CAUniversity of Manitoba · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Fractional anisotropy (FA), axial diffusivity (AD), and radial diffusivity (RD) are commonly used as MRI biomarkers of white matter microstructure in diffusion MRI studies of neurodevelopment, brain aging, and neurologic injury/disease. Some of the more frequent practices include performing voxel-wise or region-based analyses of these measures to cross-sectionally compare individuals or groups, longitudinally assess individuals or groups, and/or correlate with demographic, behavioral or clinical variables. However, it is now widely recognized that the majority of cerebral white matter voxels contain multiple fiber populations with different trajectories, which renders these metrics highly sensitive to the relative volume fractions of the various fiber populations, the microstructural integrity of each constituent fiber population, and the interaction between these factors. Many diffusion imaging experts are aware of these limitations and now generally avoid using FA, AD or RD (at least in isolation) to draw strong reverse inferences about white matter microstructure, but based on the continued application and interpretation of these metrics in the broader biomedical/neuroscience literature, it appears that this has perhaps not yet become common knowledge among diffusion imaging end-users. Therefore, this paper will briefly discuss the complex biophysical underpinnings of these measures in the context of crossing fibers, provide some intuitive "thought experiments" to highlight how conventional interpretations can lead to incorrect conclusions, and suggest that future studies refrain from using (over-interpreting) FA, AD, and RD values as standalone biomarkers of cerebral white matter microstructure.

Indexed as

axial diffusivitycrossing fibersdiffusion MRIfractional anisotropyradial diffusivitywhite matter

Identifiers

PMID35095400
PMCPMC8795606
OpenAlexW4205639396

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.