Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 974

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Automatic 3‐D model‐based neuroanatomical segmentation

Collins, D. Louis, Holmes, C. J., Peters, T. M., Evans, A. C.·1995·Human Brain Mapping

Abstract

Explicit segmentation is required for many forms of quantitative neuroanatomic analysis. However, manual methods are time‐consuming and subject to errors in both accuracy and reproducibility (precision). A 3‐D model‐based segmentation method is presented in this paper for the completely automatic identification and delineation of gross anatomical structures of the human brain based on their appearance in magnetic resonance images (MRI). The approach depends on a general, iterative, hierarchical non‐linear registration procedure and a 3‐D digital model of human brain anatomy that contains both volumetric intensity‐based data and a geometric atlas. Here, the traditional segmentation strategy is inverted: instead of matching geometric contours from and idealized atlas directly to the MRI data, segmentation is achieved by identifying the non‐linear spatial transformation that best maps corresponding intensity‐based features between a model image and a new MRI brain volume. When completed, atlas contours defined on the model image are mapped through the same transformation to segment and label individual structures in the new data set. Using manually segmented sturcture boundaries for comparison, measures of volumetric difference and volumetric overlap were less than 2% and better than 97% for realistic brain phantom data, and less than 10% and better than 85%, respectively, for human MRI data. This compares favorably to intra‐observer variability estimates of 4.9% and 87%, respectively. The procedure performs well, is objective and its implementation robust. The procedure requires no manual intervention, and is thus applicable to studies of large numbers of subjects. The general method for non‐linear image matching is also useful for non‐linear mapping of brain data sets into stereotaxic space if the target volume is already in stereotaxic space. © 1995 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

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.460030304

Cites

1 of 1 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

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

Cited by

See all 974

Metadata

Authors
Collins, D. L., Holmes, C. J., Peters, T. M., & Evans, A. C.
Venue
Human Brain Mapping
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1995-01
Volume
3
Issue
3
Pages
190-208
ISSN
  • 1065-9471 (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0193
OpenAlex
W2136148445
Cited by
974
References
1
FWCI
16.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.