Cited by 255Medical Image Segmentation TechniquesFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications

Evaluation of volume-based and surface-based brain image registration methods

Open access
Klein, Arno, Ghosh, Satrajit S., Avants, Brian, Yeo, B.T.T., Fischl, Bruce, Ardekani, Babak, Gee, James C., Mann, J.J. +1 more·2010·NeuroImage

Abstract

Establishing correspondences across brains for the purposes of comparison and group analysis is almost universally done by registering images to one another either directly or via a template. However, there are many registration algorithms to choose from. A recent evaluation of fully automated nonlinear deformation methods applied to brain image registration was restricted to volume-based methods. The present study is the first that directly compares some of the most accurate of these volume registration methods with surface registration methods, as well as the first study to compare registrations of whole-head and brain-only (de-skulled) images. We used permutation tests to compare the overlap or Hausdorff distance performance for more than 16,000 registrations between 80 manually labeled brain images. We compared every combination of volume-based and surface-based labels, registration, and evaluation. Our primary findings are the following: 1. de-skulling aids volume registration methods; 2. custom-made optimal average templates improve registration over direct pairwise registration; and 3. resampling volume labels on surfaces or converting surface labels to volumes introduces distortions that preclude a fair comparison between the highest ranking volume and surface registration methods using present resampling methods. From the results of this study, we recommend constructing a custom template from a limited sample drawn from the same or a similar representative population, using the same algorithm used for registering brains to the template.

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 · 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.01.091

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Avants Brian B Pluta John Das S Yushkevich Paul Mechanic-Hamilton Dawn Glynn Simon Pickup Stephen Liu W Gee JC The Optimal Template Effect on Automated Hippocampus Labeling in Health and Disease NeuroImage in press

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Klein, A., Ghosh, S. S., Avants, B., Yeo, B. T. T., Fischl, B., Ardekani, B., Gee, J. C., Mann, J. J., & Parsey, R. V.
Affiliations
  • New York State Psychiatric Institute (US)
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Nathan Kline Institute for Psychiatric Research (US)
Corresponding author
Klein, Arno
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-05
Volume
51
Issue
1
Pages
214-220
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2099869863
Cited by
255
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 24 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 17
FWCI
19.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • NeuroImage (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Center for Research Resources (P41-RR14075, BIRN002, U24 RR021382)
  • National Institute on Aging (AG02238)
  • National Institutes of Health (U54 EB005149, R01 MH084029)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01 NS052585-01)
  • Ellison Medical Foundation
  • National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (R01 EB006758, R03 EB008201, R03 EB008673)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Medical Image Segmentation Techniques
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Keywords
brain image registration, surface registration, template-based registration, Hausdorff distance, registration evaluation, permutation tests, label overlap, nonlinear deformation
MeSH terms
Adult, Algorithms, Brain, Female, Head, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Organ Size, Software, Imaging, Three-Dimensional, Young Adult

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