Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37572766›Full record

ArticleNeuroImage2023

A systematic comparison of VBM pipelines and their application to age prediction.

Georgios Antonopoulos, Shammi More, Federico Raimondo, Simon B Eickhoff, Felix Hoffstaedter, Kaustubh R Patil

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NeuroImage, 2023. 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
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Calibration of MRI-based reference intervals to new samples.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Georgios AntonopoulosInstitute of Systems Neuroscience, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany; Institute of Neuroscience and Medicine (INM-7: Brain and Behaviour), Research Centre Jülich, Jülich, Germany.
Shammi MoreInstitute of Systems Neuroscience, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany; Institute of Neuroscience and Medicine (INM-7: Brain and Behaviour), Research Centre Jülich, Jülich, Germany.
Federico RaimondoInstitute of Systems Neuroscience, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany; Institute of Neuroscience and Medicine (INM-7: Brain and Behaviour), Research Centre Jülich, Jülich, Germany.
Simon B EickhoffInstitute of Systems Neuroscience, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany; Institute of Neuroscience and Medicine (INM-7: Brain and Behaviour), Research Centre Jülich, Jülich, Germany.
Felix HoffstaedterInstitute of Systems Neuroscience, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany; Institute of Neuroscience and Medicine (INM-7: Brain and Behaviour), Research Centre Jülich, Jülich, Germany.
Kaustubh R PatilInstitute of Systems Neuroscience, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany; Institute of Neuroscience and Medicine (INM-7: Brain and Behaviour), Research Centre Jülich, Jülich, Germany. Electronic address: k.patil@fz-juelich.de.
Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf · DE

Funding

Meta-anaylsis in human brain mappingR01MH074457 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCIENCE CENTER · PI FOX, PETER THORNTON · 2006 to 2024
$10.5M
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH074457
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Voxel-based morphometry (VBM) analysis is commonly used for localized quantification of gray matter volume (GMV). Several alternatives exist to implement a VBM pipeline. However, how these alternatives compare and their utility in applications, such as the estimation of aging effects, remain largely unclear. This leaves researchers wondering which VBM pipeline they should use for their project. In this study, we took a user-centric perspective and systematically compared five VBM pipelines, together with registration to either a general or a study-specific template, utilizing three large datasets (n>500 each). Considering the known effect of aging on GMV, we first compared the pipelines in their ability of individual-level age prediction and found markedly varied results. To examine whether these results arise from systematic differences between the pipelines, we classified them based on their GMVs, resulting in near-perfect accuracy. To gain deeper insights, we examined the impact of different VBM steps using the region-wise similarity between pipelines. The results revealed marked differences, largely driven by segmentation and registration steps. We observed large variability in subject-identification accuracies, highlighting the interpipeline differences in individual-level quantification of GMV. As a biologically meaningful criterion we correlated regional GMV with age. The results were in line with the age-prediction analysis, and two pipelines, CAT and the combination of fMRIPrep for tissue characterization with FSL for registration, reflected age information better.

Indexed as

Gray MatterMagnetic Resonance ImagingCerebral Cortex

Identifiers

PMID37572766
PMCPMC10529438
OpenAlexW4385728818

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.