ArticlePloS one2024
Simulating rigid head motion artifacts on brain magnitude MRI data-Outcome on image quality and segmentation of the cerebral cortex.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bias in Structural MRI Correlates of Delay Discounting due to Head Motion.Human brain mapping · 2026Article
- Assessing Impact of Data Quality in Early Post-Operative Glioblastoma Segmentation.Journal of imaging · 2026Article
- Accuracies of four simulation approaches in reproducing motion artifacts and morphometric parameter biases.Magma (New York, N.Y.) · 2025Article
- Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of AI-driven MRI Motion Artifact Detection and Correction.ArXiv · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) datasets from epidemiological studies often show a lower prevalence of motion artifacts than what is encountered in clinical practice. These artifacts can be unevenly distributed between subject groups and studies which introduces a bias that needs addressing when augmenting data for machine learning purposes. Since unreconstructed multi-channel k-space data is typically not available for population-based MRI datasets, motion simulations must be performed using signal magnitude data. There is thus a need to systematically evaluate how realistic such magnitude-based simulations are. We performed magnitude-based motion simulations on a dataset (MR-ART) from 148 subjects in which real motion-corrupted reference data was also available. The similarity of real and simulated motion was assessed by using image quality metrics (IQMs) including Coefficient of Joint Variation (CJV), Signal-to-Noise-Ratio (SNR), and Contrast-to-Noise-Ratio (CNR). An additional comparison was made by investigating the decrease in the Dice-Sørensen Coefficient (DSC) of automated segmentations with increasing motion severity. Segmentation of the cerebral cortex was performed with 6 freely available tools: FreeSurfer, BrainSuite, ANTs, SAMSEG, FastSurfer, and SynthSeg+. To better mimic the real subject motion, the original motion simulation within an existing data augmentation framework (TorchIO), was modified. This allowed a non-random motion paradigm and phase encoding direction. The mean difference in CJV/SNR/CNR between the real motion-corrupted images and our modified simulations (0.004±0.054/-0.7±1.8/-0.09±0.55) was lower than that of the original simulations (0.015±0.061/0.2±2.0/-0.29±0.62). Further, the mean difference in the DSC between the real motion-corrupted images was lower for our modified simulations (0.03±0.06) compared to the original simulations (-0.15±0.09). SynthSeg+ showed the highest robustness towards all forms of motion, real and simulated. In conclusion, reasonably realistic synthetic motion artifacts can be induced on a large-scale when only magnitude MR images are available to obtain unbiased data sets for the training of machine learning based models.
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.