• J Neuroimaging · Jan 2025

    Comparative Study

    A novel automated pipeline to assess MR spectroscopy quality control: Comparing current standards and manual assessment.

    • Bodhi Beroukhim, Skyler McComas, Julie M Joyce, Luisa S Schuhmacher, Inga Koerte, Zhou Lan, and Alexander Lin.
    • Center for Clinical Spectroscopy, Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
    • J Neuroimaging. 2025 Jan 1; 35 (1): e13246e13246.

    Background And PurposeThe absence of a consensus data quality control (DQC) process inhibits the widespread adoption of MR spectroscopy. Poor DQC can lead to unreliable clinical diagnosis and irreproducible research conclusions. Currently, manual visual assessment or the standard quantitative metrics of signal-to-noise, linewidth, and model fit are used as classifiers, but these measures may not be sufficient. To supplement standard metrics, this paper proposes a novel automated DQC pipeline named Visual Evaluative Control Technology Of Resonance Spectroscopy (VECTORS).MethodsManual DQC ratings were conducted on 7180 spectra obtained from 110 young adults using short-echo chemical shift imaging at 3 Tesla. Four reviewers conducted manual ratings on the presence of artifacts and location of metabolites. The ratings were labor intensive, taking over 180 hours. VECTORS was developed to quantify their DQC criteria, detecting artifacts that present as duplicate peaks, vertical shifts, and glutamine + glutamate and myoinositol peak shapes. Run on the same data using a standard laptop, VECTORS only took 2 hours.ResultsThe manual ratings were not monotonic to the standard quantitative metrics. VECTORS correctly flagged spectra that the manual ratings missed. VECTORS accurately flagged an additional 126 poor DQ spectra that consensus cutoffs of the standard quantitative metrics deemed good DQ.ConclusionStandard quantitative metrics may not account for all DQC artifacts as they are not monotonic to the manual ratings. However, manual ratings are labor intensive, subjective, and irreproducible. VECTORS addresses these issues and should be used in conjunction with standard quantitative metrics.© 2024 American Society of Neuroimaging.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…