-
- Xiao Han, Jorge Jovicich, David Salat, Andre van der Kouwe, Brian Quinn, Silvester Czanner, Evelina Busa, Jenni Pacheco, Marilyn Albert, Ronald Killiany, Paul Maguire, Diana Rosas, Nikos Makris, Anders Dale, Bradford Dickerson, and Bruce Fischl.
- Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02129, USA.
- Neuroimage. 2006 Aug 1;32(1):180-94.
AbstractIn vivo MRI-derived measurements of human cerebral cortex thickness are providing novel insights into normal and abnormal neuroanatomy, but little is known about their reliability. We investigated how the reliability of cortical thickness measurements is affected by MRI instrument-related factors, including scanner field strength, manufacturer, upgrade and pulse sequence. Several data processing factors were also studied. Two test-retest data sets were analyzed: 1) 15 healthy older subjects scanned four times at 2-week intervals on three scanners; 2) 5 subjects scanned before and after a major scanner upgrade. Within-scanner variability of global cortical thickness measurements was <0.03 mm, and the point-wise standard deviation of measurement error was approximately 0.12 mm. Variability was 0.15 mm and 0.17 mm in average, respectively, for cross-scanner (Siemens/GE) and cross-field strength (1.5 T/3 T) comparisons. Scanner upgrade did not increase variability nor introduce bias. Measurements across field strength, however, were slightly biased (thicker at 3 T). The number of (single vs. multiple averaged) acquisitions had a negligible effect on reliability, but the use of a different pulse sequence had a larger impact, as did different parameters employed in data processing. Sample size estimates indicate that regional cortical thickness difference of 0.2 mm between two different groups could be identified with as few as 7 subjects per group, and a difference of 0.1 mm could be detected with 26 subjects per group. These results demonstrate that MRI-derived cortical thickness measures are highly reliable when MRI instrument and data processing factors are controlled but that it is important to consider these factors in the design of multi-site or longitudinal studies, such as clinical drug trials.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?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.
.