Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42065835›Full record

ArticleNeuroinformatics2026

Template-Based Label Propagation for Mouse Brain MRI Skull Stripping.

Rui Gong, Andrii Gegliuk, Daria Sharapova, Bhanu Sharma, Yoshifumi Abe, Ken Nakae, Shin Ishii, Sho Yagishita

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neuroinformatics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Rui GongIntegrated Systems Biology Laboratory, Department of Systems Science, Graduate School of Informatics, Kyoto University, Kyoto, 606-8501, Japan. rgon011@gmail.com.
Andrii GegliukLaboratory of Structural Physiology, Center for Disease Biology and Integrative Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, 113-0033, Japan.
Daria SharapovaLaboratory of Structural Physiology, Center for Disease Biology and Integrative Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, 113-0033, Japan.
Bhanu SharmaLaboratory of Structural Physiology, Center for Disease Biology and Integrative Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, 113-0033, Japan.
Yoshifumi AbeDivision of Brain Sciences, Institute for Advanced Medical Research, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, 160-8582, Japan.
Ken NakaeGraduate School of Engineering, University of Fukui, Fukui, 910-8507, Japan.
Shin IshiiIntegrated Systems Biology Laboratory, Department of Systems Science, Graduate School of Informatics, Kyoto University, Kyoto, 606-8501, Japan.
Sho YagishitaLaboratory of Structural Physiology, Center for Disease Biology and Integrative Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, 113-0033, Japan.

Funding

Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development JP23wm0625001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accurate skull stripping is an essential preprocessing step in mouse brain magnetic resonance imaging, particularly for reliable atlas registration and large scale population studies. Existing approaches are often labor intensive, sensitive to inter subject variability, and typically require manual brain masks for many individual subjects. We present a high throughput skull stripping pipeline that utilize template-based label propagation to efficiently generate training data for automated segmentation. A population average ex vivo T2-weighted mouse brain MRI template including the skull was constructed, and a single brain mask was manually annotated in template space. This mask was propagated to individual subjects using inverse transformations and used to train an attention-based 3D U-Net segmentation model. Compared with conventional pipelines requiring manual masks from multiple subjects, the proposed approach achieves competitive segmentation performance while substantially reducing manual annotation effort. Additional experiments comparing training with propagated labels, manual labels, and their combination showed that training on propagated labels alone provided robust performance, suggesting that label consistency may be as important as label quality. To evaluate generalizability, we conducted experiments on an independent in vivo mouse MRI dataset. Direct application of the trained model using ex vivo data to in vivo data resulted in reduced performance, indicating a domain shift between imaging conditions. However, applying the full pipeline to the in vivo dataset, including template construction and label propagation, yielded strong segmentation performance. These results indicate that, while trained models are domain specific, the proposed framework is adaptable across imaging conditions and provides a practical strategy for generating large, anatomically consistent training datasets for biomedical image segmentation.

Indexed as

BrainDeep LearningImaging, Three-DimensionalMagnetic Resonance ImagingAnimalsDatasets as TopicMiceSkullDeep learning segmentationLabel propagationMouse brain MRISkull stripping

Identifiers

PMID42065835
PMCPMC13135007

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.