ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2024
Decoding the Best Automated Segmentation Tools for Vascular White Matter Hyperintensities in the Aging Brain: A Clinician's Guide to Precision and Purpose.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cerebrovascular damage from small vessel disease (SVD) occurs in healthy and pathological aging. SVD markers, such as white matter hyperintensities (WMH), are commonly found in individuals over 60 and increase in prevalence with age. WMHs are detectable on standard MRI by adhering to the STRIVE criteria. Currently, visual assessment scales are used in clinical and research scenarios but is time-consuming and has rater variability, limiting its practicality. Addressing this issue, our study aimed to determine the most precise WMH segmentation software, offering insights into methodology and usability to balance clinical precision with practical application. This study employed a dataset comprising T1, FLAIR, and DWI images from 300 cognitively healthy older adults. WMHs in this cohort were evaluated using four automated neuroimaging tools: Lesion Prediction Algorithm (LPA) and Lesion Growth Algorithm (LGA) from Lesion Segmentation Tool (LST), Sequence Adaptive Multimodal Segmentation (SAMSEG), and Brain Intensity Abnormalities Classification Algorithm (BIANCA). Additionally, clinicians manually segmented WMHs in a subsample of 45 participants to establish a gold standard. The study assessed correlations with the Fazekas scale, algorithm performance, and the influence of WMH volume on reliability. Results indicated that supervised algorithms were superior, particularly in detecting small WMHs, and can improve their consistency when used in parallel with unsupervised tools. The research also proposed a biomarker for moderate vascular damage, derived from the top 95th percentile of WMH volume in healthy individuals aged 50 to 60. This biomarker effectively differentiated subgroups within the cohort, correlating with variations in brain structure and behavior.
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.