Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36208399›Full record

ArticleBrain topography2022

Comparison of FreeSurfer and CAT12 Software in Parcel-Based Cortical Thickness Calculations.

Ulaş Ay, Gozde Kizilates-Evin, Ali Bayram, Elif Kurt, Tamer Demiralp

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Brain topography, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Post mortem cadaveric and imaging mapping analysis of the influence of cochlear implants on cMRI assessment regarding implant positioning and artifact formation.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

5 authors.

Ulaş AyGraduate School of Health Sciences, Istanbul University, Süleymaniye Mah. Bozdoğan Kemeri Cd, Vezneciler Hamamı Sk No:8, 34126, Istanbul, Turkey. psk.ulasay@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0001-7896-3681
Gozde Kizilates-EvinDepartment of Neuroscience, Aziz Sancar Institute of Experimental Medicine, Istanbul University, Topkapı Mah. Turgut Özal Millet Cd No:118, 34093, Istanbul, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0001-5518-6015
Ali BayramDepartment of Neuroscience, Aziz Sancar Institute of Experimental Medicine, Istanbul University, Topkapı Mah. Turgut Özal Millet Cd No:118, 34093, Istanbul, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0002-6588-3479
Elif KurtDepartment of Neuroscience, Aziz Sancar Institute of Experimental Medicine, Istanbul University, Topkapı Mah. Turgut Özal Millet Cd No:118, 34093, Istanbul, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0003-1956-575X
Tamer DemiralpNeuroimaging Unit, Hulusi Behcet Life Sciences Research Laboratory, Neuroimaging Unit, Istanbul University, Topkapı Mah. Turgut Özal Millet Cd No:118, 34093, Istanbul, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0002-6803-734X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Several approaches have emerged to measure the cortical thickness (CT), which can be broadly divided into surface-based and voxel-based algorithms. We aimed to compare parcel-based CT estimation of the widely used FreeSurfer (FS) software and CAT12 software, which is a widely used voxel-based approach, and evaluate the test-retest (TRT) reliability of both methods. MRI images of 417 healthy individuals were analyzed. TRT reliability was performed on 60 participants. The mean CT of the parcels of the Desikan-Killiany atlas were calculated both in FS and CAT12. Linear mixed model was performed to compare the two methods and the TRT reliability, and paired-sample t-test for post-hoc analyses. Linear regression analyses were utilized to examine the regressions between the two methods and between different sessions with each method. CT values calculated using the two methods were significantly correlated (R

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingSoftwareAlgorithmsHumansLinear ModelsReproducibility of ResultsBrain morphometryCAT12Cortical thicknessFreeSurfer

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.