Cited by 1,088Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 53 of the 53 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Investigating the prevalence of complex fiber configurations in white matter tissue with diffusion magnetic resonance imaging

Open access

Abstract

It has long been recognized that the diffusion tensor model is inappropriate to characterize complex fiber architecture, causing tensor-derived measures such as the primary eigenvector and fractional anisotropy to be unreliable or misleading in these regions. There is however still debate about the impact of this problem in practice. A recent study using a Bayesian automatic relevance detection (ARD) multicompartment model suggested that a third of white matter (WM) voxels contain crossing fibers, a value that, whilst already significant, is likely to be an underestimate. The aim of this study is to provide more robust estimates of the proportion of affected voxels, the number of fiber orientations within each WM voxel, and the impact on tensor-derived analyses, using large, high-quality diffusion-weighted data sets, with reconstruction parameters optimized specifically for this task. Two reconstruction algorithms were used: constrained spherical deconvolution (CSD), and the ARD method used in the previous study. We estimate the proportion of WM voxels containing crossing fibers to be ~90% (using CSD) and 63% (using ARD). Both these values are much higher than previously reported, strongly suggesting that the diffusion tensor model is inadequate in the vast majority of WM regions. This has serious implications for downstream processing applications that depend on this model, particularly tractography, and the interpretation of anisotropy and radial/axial diffusivity measures.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/hbm.22099

Cites

53 of 53 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 53 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Jones DK, 2005, Contribution of cardiac pulsation to variability of tractography results, Proc Intl Soc Magn Reson Med, 13, 222
  2. PierpaoliC MarencoS RohdeG JonesDK BarnettAS(2003):Analyzing the contribution of cardiac pulsation to the variability of quantities derived from the diffusion tensor. Proceedings of the 11th Scientific Meeting International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine Toronto Canada. p70.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–300 of 1,000

Metadata

Authors
Jeurissen, B., Leemans, A., Tournier, J., Jones, D. K., & Sijbers, J.
Affiliations
  • University of Antwerp (BE)
  • University Medical Center Utrecht (NL)
  • Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health (AU)
  • Cardiff University (GB)
Venue
Human Brain Mapping
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-05-19
Volume
34
Issue
11
Pages
2747-2766
ISSN
  • 1065-9471 (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0193
OpenAlex
W2137679584
Cited by
1,088
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 70 · 2025: 82 · 2024: 83 · 2023: 93 · 2022: 92 · 2021: 111 · 2020: 81 · 2019: 76 · 2018: 69 · 2017: 80 · 2016: 63 · 2015: 78 · 2014: 40 · 2013: 55 · 2012: 14
FWCI
45.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Human Brain Mapping (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Bank (Australian Catholic University) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust (096646, 096646/Z/11/Z)
  • State Government of Victoria
  • National Health and Medical Research Council
  • National Medical Research Council
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Keywords
crossing fibers, white matter microstructure, diffusion MRI, constrained spherical deconvolution, multi-compartment model, fiber orientation distribution, tractography, fractional anisotropy
MeSH terms
Adult, Algorithms, Brain, Brain Mapping, Data Interpretation, Statistical, False Positive Reactions, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Nerve Fibers, Reproducibility of Results, Anisotropy, Excitatory Postsynaptic Potentials, Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Signal-To-Noise Ratio

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review