ArticleBrain structure & function2025
Systematic bias in surface area asymmetry measurements from automatic cortical parcellations.
Article in Brain structure & function, 2025. 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
- Update of
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Anatomical asymmetry is a hallmark of the human brain and may reflect hemispheric differences in its functional organization. Widely used software like FreeSurfer can automate neuroanatomical measurements and facilitate studies of hemispheric asymmetry. However, patterns of surface area lateralization measured using FreeSurfer are curiously consistent across diverse samples. Here, we demonstrate systematic biases in these measurements obtained from the default processing pipeline. We compared surface area asymmetry measured from reconstructions of original brains vs. the same scans after flipping their left-right orientation. The default pipeline returned implausible asymmetry patterns between the original and flipped brains: Many structures were always left- or right-lateralized. Notably, these biases occur prominently in key speech and language regions. In contrast, manual labeling and curvature-based parcellations of key structures both yielded the expected reversals of left/right lateralization in flipped brains. We determined that these biases result from discrepancies in how regional labels are defined between the cortical parcellation atlases' left and right hemispheres. These biases are carried into individual parcellations because the parcellation algorithm prioritizes vertex correspondence to the template over individual neuroanatomical variation, meaning such biases could exist in any asymmetric atlas-based parcellation. We further demonstrate several straightforward, bias-free approaches to measuring surface area asymmetry, including using symmetric registration templates and parcellation atlases, vertex-wise analyses, and within-subject curvature-based parcellations. These results highlight theoretical concerns about using only atlas-based parcellations to make inferences about population-level brain asymmetry and underscore the need for validating bias-free neuroanatomical measurements, particularly to better examine how structural lateralization underlies functional lateralization.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40762726What 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.