ArticleSurgical neurology international2025
Artificial intelligence in corticospinal tract segmentation using constrained spherical deconvolution.
Article in Surgical neurology international, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Dentato-rubro-thalamic tract tractography: Constrained spherical deconvolution versus diffusion tensor imaging for essential tremor deep brain stimulation targeting.Surgical neurology international · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Tractography of cerebral white matter tracts is a technique with applications in neurosurgical planning and the diagnosis of neurological diseases. In this context, the approach based on the constrained spherical deconvolution (CSD) algorithm allows for more efficient and plausible segmentations. This study aimed to compare two CSD techniques for corticospinal tract (CST) segmentation. Methods: This study examined 40 diffusion-weighted images (DWIs) acquired at 7T from healthy participants in the human connectome project (HCP) and 12 clinical 1.5T DWIs from patients undergoing neurosurgical procedures. Tractography was performed using two techniques: regions of interest-based approach and an automatic approach using the TractSeg neural network. The volume of the CST segmented by the two methods was compared using the Dice similarity coefficient. Results: There was a low similarity between the CST volumes segmented by the two techniques (Dice index for the HCP: 0.479 ± 0.04; Dice index for the Clinical: 0.404 ± 0.08). However, both techniques achieved high levels of consistency in sequential measurements, with intraclass correlation coefficient values above 0.995 for all comparisons. In addition, all selected metrics showed significant differences when comparing the two techniques (HCP - volume Conclusion: Both methods demonstrate a high degree of consistency; however, the automatic approach appears to be more consistent overall. When comparing the CST segmentations between the two methods, we observed only a moderate similarity and differences in all considered metrics.
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.