Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35904522›Full record

ArticleThe European journal of neuroscience2022

Effect of number of diffusion-encoding directions in diffusion metrics of 5-year-olds using tract-based spatial statistical analysis.

Venla Kumpulainen, Harri Merisaari, Anni Copeland, Eero Silver, Elmo P Pulli, John D Lewis, Ekaterina Saukko, Jani Saunavaara, Linnea Karlsson, Hasse Karlsson and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The European journal of neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Diffusion tensor imaging in Chediak Higashi Disease.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. 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

11 authors.

Venla KumpulainenFinnBrain Birth Cohort Study, Turku Brain and Mind Center, Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Turku, Turku, Finland.ORCID 0000-0003-3375-5445
Harri MerisaariFinnBrain Birth Cohort Study, Turku Brain and Mind Center, Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Turku, Turku, Finland.ORCID 0000-0002-8515-5399
Anni CopelandFinnBrain Birth Cohort Study, Turku Brain and Mind Center, Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Turku, Turku, Finland.
Eero SilverFinnBrain Birth Cohort Study, Turku Brain and Mind Center, Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Turku, Turku, Finland.
Elmo P PulliFinnBrain Birth Cohort Study, Turku Brain and Mind Center, Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Turku, Turku, Finland.ORCID 0000-0003-3871-8563
John D LewisMontreal Neurological Institute, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Ekaterina SaukkoDepartment of Radiology, Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland.
Jani SaunavaaraDepartment of Medical Physics, Turku University Hospital and University of Turku, Turku, Finland.
Linnea KarlssonFinnBrain Birth Cohort Study, Turku Brain and Mind Center, Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Turku, Turku, Finland.
Hasse KarlssonFinnBrain Birth Cohort Study, Turku Brain and Mind Center, Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Turku, Turku, Finland.
Jetro J TuulariFinnBrain Birth Cohort Study, Turku Brain and Mind Center, Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Turku, Turku, Finland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Methodological aspects and effects of different imaging parameters on DTI (diffusion tensor imaging) results and their reproducibility have been recently studied comprehensively in adult populations. Although MR imaging of children's brains has become common, less interest has been focussed on researching whether adult-based optimised parameters and pre-processing protocols can be reliably applied to paediatric populations. Furthermore, DTI scalar values of preschool aged children are rarely reported. We gathered a DTI dataset from 5-year-old children (N = 49) to study the effect of the number of diffusion-encoding directions on the reliability of resultant scalar values with TBSS (tract-based spatial statistics) method. Additionally, the potential effect of within-scan head motion on DTI scalars was evaluated. Reducing the number of diffusion-encoding directions deteriorated both the accuracy and the precision of all DTI scalar values. To obtain reliable scalar values, a minimum of 18 directions for TBSS was required. For TBSS fractional anisotropy values, the intraclass correlation coefficient with two-way random-effects model (ICC[2,1]) for the subsets of 6 to 66 directions ranged between 0.136 [95%CI 0.0767;0.227] and 0.639 [0.542;0.740], whereas the corresponding values for subsets of 18 to 66 directions were 0.868 [0.815;0.913] and 0.995 [0.993;0.997]. Following the exclusion of motion-corrupted volumes, minor residual motion did not associate with the scalar values. A minimum of 18 diffusion directions is recommended to result in reliable DTI scalar results with TBSS. We suggest gathering extra directions in paediatric DTI to enable exclusion of volumes with motion artefacts and simultaneously preserve the overall data quality.

Indexed as

BrainDiffusion Tensor ImagingAdultAnisotropyChildChild, PreschoolHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingReproducibility of Resultsdiffusion encoding directionsDTIpaediatric MR imagingTBSS

Identifiers

PMID35904522
PMCPMC9545012

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.