ArticleThe British journal of radiology2025
Splenial angle on axial T1 and fluid-attenuated inversion-recovery MRI images and idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus.
Article in The British journal of radiology, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe splenial angle (SA), measured on axial DTI colour fractional anisotropy MRI, outperformed the callosal angle (CA) in predicting idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (NPH) patients from those with Alzheimer's dementia, Parkinson's disease (PD), and healthy controls (HC). We investigated its reliability and classification performance on more commonly acquired T1 magnetization-prepared rapid gradient-echo (MPRAGE) and fluid-attenuated inversion-recovery (FLAIR) images.
methodsSplenial angle was measured on axial MPRAGE and FLAIR images in 57 subjects (19 NPH, PD and HC each) by 2 raters and compared across groups. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis was used to assess its classification performance, differentiating NPH from non-NPH groups, in comparison to the CA.
resultsInter-rater reliability for SA was excellent (intraclass correlation coefficients ≥ 0.91). Splenial angle was effective in differentiating NPH from non-NPH patients on MPRAGE and FLAIR images (P < .001). Its ROC curves showed excellent performance classifying NPH from HC (Area under the curve [AUC] 1) and PD (AUC > 0.93) groups and were highly comparable to those for CA (1; 0.947). Angles wider than 60° and narrower than 45° robustly (100%) excluded and predicted NPH from HC, respectively. The narrower 45° cutoff yielded better sensitivity (84.2%-89.5%) in differentiating NPH from PD patients.
conclusionsThe SA on MPRAGE/FLAIR images showed excellent inter-rater reliability and classification performance predicting NPH from non-NPH groups, rivalling those of the CA. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: The SA on MPRAGE and FLAIR images is reproducible and shows excellent diagnostic performance, differentiating NPH from non-NPH groups, with potential to replace the CA in NPH screening given its accessibility on routine axial neuroimaging.
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.