Cited by 2,956Medical Image Segmentation TechniquesFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesAnatomy and Medical Technology

Automatic parcellation of human cortical gyri and sulci using standard anatomical nomenclature

Open access
Destrieux, Christophe, Fischl, Bruce, Dale, Anders, Halgren, Eric·2010·NeuroImage

Abstract

Precise localization of sulco-gyral structures of the human cerebral cortex is important for the interpretation of morpho-functional data, but requires anatomical expertise and is time consuming because of the brain's geometric complexity. Software developed to automatically identify sulco-gyral structures has improved substantially as a result of techniques providing topologically correct reconstructions permitting inflated views of the human brain. Here we describe a complete parcellation of the cortical surface using standard internationally accepted nomenclature and criteria. This parcellation is available in the FreeSurfer package. First, a computer-assisted hand parcellation classified each vertex as sulcal or gyral, and these were then subparcellated into 74 labels per hemisphere. Twelve datasets were used to develop rules and algorithms (reported here) that produced labels consistent with anatomical rules as well as automated computational parcellation. The final parcellation was used to build an atlas for automatically labeling the whole cerebral cortex. This atlas was used to label an additional 12 datasets, which were found to have good concordance with manual labels. This paper presents a precisely defined method for automatically labeling the cortical surface in standard terminology.

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.2010.06.010

Cites

39 of 39 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?

  • The most popularly used cortical parcellation is the Freesurfer Desikan-Killiany cortical parcellation, while many other cortical parcellation schemes have also been widely used.

    “The most popularly used cortical parcellation is the Freesurfer Desikan-Killiany cortical parcellation (Desikan et al., 2006; Fischl, 2012), while many other cortical parcellation schemes have also been widely used (Destrieux et al., 2010; Shattuck et al., 2008; Tzourio-Mazoyer et al., 2002).”

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

2 of the 41 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Zilles K Schleicher A Langemann C Amunts K Morosan P 1997 Quantitative analysis of sulci in the human cerebral cortex: development, regional heterogeneity, gender difference, asymetry, intersubject variability and cortical architecture Hum Brain Mapp 5 218 221 20408218

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Destrieux, C., Fischl, B., Dale, A., & Halgren, E.
Affiliations
  • Université de Tours (FR)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • University of California San Diego (US)
Corresponding author
Destrieux, Christophe
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-10
Volume
53
Issue
1
Pages
1-15
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2007581301
Cited by
2,956
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 272 · 2025: 328 · 2024: 287 · 2023: 290 · 2022: 291 · 2021: 272 · 2020: 241 · 2019: 188 · 2018: 189 · 2017: 163 · 2016: 130 · 2015: 98 · 2014: 75 · 2013: 62 · 2012: 44
FWCI
48.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • NeuroImage (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Centre Hospitalier Régional et Universitaire de Tours
  • National Institute for Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01 NS18741, R01 NS052585)
  • National Center for Research Resources (P41-RR14075, BIRN002, U24 RR021382)
  • National Institute for Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (R01 EB001550, R01 EB006758, R01 EB009282)
  • National Institute on Aging (R01 AG02238)
  • Mental Illness and Neuroscience Discovery (MIND) Institute
  • National Institutes of Health (U54 EB005149)
  • Ellison Medical Foundation
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Medical Image Segmentation Techniques
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Anatomy and Medical Technology
Keywords
cortical parcellation, FreeSurfer, anatomical terminology, brain surface reconstruction
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Algorithms, Brain, Computer Simulation, Female, Humans, Image Enhancement, Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Models, Anatomic, Terminology as Topic, Pattern Recognition, Automated, Sensitivity and Specificity, Reproducibility of Results, 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