ArticleAJNR. American journal of neuroradiology2022
A Comparison of Global Brain Volumetrics Obtained from CT versus MRI Using 2 Publicly Available Software Packages.
Article in AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
background and purposeBrain volumetrics have historically been obtained from MR imaging data. However, advances in CT, along with refined publicly available software packages, may support tissue-level segmentations of clinical CT images. Here, brain volumetrics obtained by applying two publicly available software packages to paired CT-MR data are compared. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn a group of patients (
resultsRegression analysis showed good agreement between volumes derived from MR images versus those from CT. The correlation coefficients between the 2 methods were 0.93 and 0.98 for Statistical Parametric Mapping and FMRIB Software Library, respectively. Differences between global volumes were significant (
conclusionsThe repeatability of CT segmentations using publicly available software is good, with good correlation with MR imaging. With careful study design and acknowledgment of measurement biases, CT may be a viable alternative to MR imaging in certain settings.
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.