SynthesisBrain imaging and behavior2024
Evolution of white matter hyperintensity segmentation methods and implementation over the past two decades; an incomplete shift towards deep learning.
Synthesis in Brain imaging and behavior, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Voxelwise correlation of neighbors as a hypothesis driven framework for characterizing white matter lesion heterogeneity.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Quantifying White Matter Hyperintensities: Automated Volumetry Compared with Visual Grading Scales.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Review
- Reliability assessment of accelerated MR sequences for the estimation of structural and vascular markers in dementia.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Deep learning-based prediction of cerebral white matter hyperintensity burden using carotid magnetic resonance angiography.Frontiers in neurology · 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
78 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This systematic review examines the prevalence, underlying mechanisms, cohort characteristics, evaluation criteria, and cohort types in white matter hyperintensity (WMH) pipeline and implementation literature spanning the last two decades. Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, we categorized WMH segmentation tools based on their methodologies from January 1, 2000, to November 18, 2022. Inclusion criteria involved articles using openly available techniques with detailed descriptions, focusing on WMH as a primary outcome. Our analysis identified 1007 visual rating scales, 118 pipeline development articles, and 509 implementation articles. These studies predominantly explored aging, dementia, psychiatric disorders, and small vessel disease, with aging and dementia being the most prevalent cohorts. Deep learning emerged as the most frequently developed segmentation technique, indicative of a heightened scrutiny in new technique development over the past two decades. We illustrate observed patterns and discrepancies between published and implemented WMH techniques. Despite increasingly sophisticated quantitative segmentation options, visual rating scales persist, with the SPM technique being the most utilized among quantitative methods and potentially serving as a reference standard for newer techniques. Our findings highlight the need for future standards in WMH segmentation, and we provide recommendations based on these observations.
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.