Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36947181›Full record

ReviewBrain structure & function2023

The elusive metric of lesion load.

Mohamed L Seghier

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Brain structure & function, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

1 author.

Mohamed L SeghierDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Khalifa University of Science and Technology, Abu Dhabi, UAE. mseghier@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1146-8800

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

One of the widely used metrics in lesion-symptom mapping is lesion load that codes the amount of damage to a given brain region of interest. Lesion load aims to reduce the complex 3D lesion information into a feature that can reflect both site of damage, defined by the location of the region of interest, and size of damage within that region of interest. Basically, the process of estimation of lesion load converts a voxel-based lesion map into a region-based lesion map, with regions defined as atlas-based or data-driven spatial patterns. Here, after examining current definitions of lesion load, four methodological issues are discussed: (1) lesion load is agnostic to the location of damage within the region of interest, and it disregards damage outside the region of interest, (2) lesion load estimates are prone to errors introduced by the uncertainty in lesion delineation, spatial warping of the lesion/region, and binarization of the lesion/region, (3) lesion load calculation depends on brain parcellation selection, and (4) lesion load does not necessarily reflect a white matter disconnection. Overall, lesion load, when calculated in a robust way, can serve as a clinically-useful feature for explaining and predicting post-stroke outcome and recovery.

Indexed as

StrokeWhite MatterBrainBrain MappingHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingAmount of damageLesion informationLesion loadLesion siteLesion sizeLesion-symptom mappingSimilarity index

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.