ArticleNeuroImage. Clinical2026
The quest for the best: manual, atlas- and spatial prior-based delineation of locus coeruleus.
Article in NeuroImage. Clinical, 2026. 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite advances in neuromelanin-sensitive brain imaging and a plethora of software solutions, the reliable non-invasive delineation of the locus coeruleus (LC) in the human brainstem remains challenging. We sought to evaluate the spatial accuracy and consistency of atlas- and probabilistic spatial prior-based LC delineation. We acquired neuromelanin-sensitive 3 T MRI data in healthy volunteers (n = 24; mean age 40.0 ± 16.8 years; 42% female). Manual labelling by 9 raters performed twice provided the basis for individual- and group-level comparisons, showing moderate inter-rater agreement (mean Dice = 0.7). For the atlas-based labelling, we tested seven open-access LC atlases, a consensus reference representing the atlases' overlap and the averaged manual labelling. Open-access atlases demonstrated low spatial concordance (Dice = 0.2-0.4), while the averaged manual labelling atlas had higher spatial overlap (Dice = 0.6). Probabilistic delineation using spatial priors showed the strongest voxel-wise similarity with manual labelling (r = 0.3) when the averaged manual labelling atlas was used as prior. Principal component analysis confirmed the greater spatial compactness for atlas-based labelling. Atlas-based labelling using the averaged manual labelling atlas in an extended 3 T cohort (n = 2393, mean age 58.44 ± 13.75 years) identified that tissue myelin and iron declined continuously from early adulthood, while free tissue water increased - a neurobiological trend robust to atlas choice. LC volume showed an inverted-U trajectory. Our results highlight the potential of atlas-based labelling for LC identification and demonstrate its sensitivity to physiologically grounded aging processes, suggesting that harmonised validation strategies and context-sensitive approaches can improve reliability.
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.