• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Human Brain Mapping >Automated Subcortical Segmentation using FIRST: Test-Retest reliability Inter-scanner reliability and Comparison to Manual Segmentation
【2h】

Automated Subcortical Segmentation using FIRST: Test-Retest reliability Inter-scanner reliability and Comparison to Manual Segmentation

机译：自动皮层下分割使用一：重测信度跨扫描仪的可靠性并比较手动分割

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务，本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文，但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁，仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况，如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Multiple techniques exist for the automated segmentation of magnetic resonance images (MRIs). The validity of these techniques can be assessed by evaluating test-retest reliability, inter-scanner reliability, and consistency with manual segmentation. We evaluate these measures for the FSL/FIRST subcortical segmentation tool. We retrospectively analyzed 190 MRI scans from 87 subjects with mood or anxiety disorders and healthy volunteers scanned multiple times on different platforms (N=56) and/or the same platform (N=45, groups overlap), and 146 scans from subjects who underwent both high-resolution and whole brain imaging in a single session, for comparison with manual segmentation of the hippocampus. The thalamus, caudate, putamen, hippocampus, and pallidum were reliably segmented in different sessions on the same scanner (ICC>0.83 scanners and diagnostic groups pooled). In these regions, the range of between-platform reliabilities were lower (0.527<ICC<0.953), although values below 0.7 were due to systematic differences between platforms, or low reliability in the hippocampus between eight- and single-channel coil platforms. Accumbens and amygdala segmentations were generally unreliable within and between scanning platforms. ICC values for hippocampal volumes between automated and manual segmentations were acceptable (ICC>0.7, groups pooled), and both methods detected significant differences between genders. Additionally, FIRST segmentations were consistent with manual segmentations (in a subset of images; N=20) in the left caudate and bilateral putamen. This retrospective analysis assesses realistic performance of the algorithm in conditions like those found in multi-site trials or meta-analyses. Additionally, the inclusion of psychiatric patients establishes reliability in subjects exhibiting volumetric abnormalities, validating patient studies.
机译：存在多种用于磁共振图像（MRI）的自动分割的技术。这些技术的有效性可以通过评估重测信度，扫描仪间信度以及与手动分割的一致性来评估。我们评估FSL / FIRST皮层下分割工具的这些措施。我们回顾性分析了87名患有情绪或焦虑症的受试者的190次MRI扫描，健康志愿者在不同平台（N = 56）和/或同一平台（N = 45，组重叠）上进行了多次扫描，并从接受过研究的受试者中进行了146次扫描一次可以同时进行高分辨率和全脑成像，以便与海马的手动分割进行比较。丘脑，尾状，壳状核，海马和苍白质在同一扫描仪（ICC> 0.83扫描仪和诊断组合并）的不同部位可靠地分割。在这些区域中，平台间的可靠性范围较低（0.527 0.7，合并组），并且两种方法都检测出性别之间的显着差异。此外，FIRST分割与左尾状和双侧壳状核的手动分割（在图像子集中； N = 20）一致。这项回顾性分析评估了在多站点试验或荟萃分析等条件下算法的实际性能。此外，纳入精神病患者可在表现出容量异常的受试者中建立可靠性，从而验证患者研究。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号