Cited by 2,402Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 191 of the 200 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

White matter integrity, fiber count, and other fallacies: The do's and don'ts of diffusion MRI

Abstract

Diffusion-weighted MRI (DW-MRI) has been increasingly used in imaging neuroscience over the last decade. An early form of this technique, diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) was rapidly implemented by major MRI scanner companies as a scanner selling point. Due to the ease of use of such implementations, and the plausibility of some of their results, DTI was leapt on by imaging neuroscientists who saw it as a powerful and unique new tool for exploring the structural connectivity of human brain. However, DTI is a rather approximate technique, and its results have frequently been given implausible interpretations that have escaped proper critique and have appeared misleadingly in journals of high reputation. In order to encourage the use of improved DW-MRI methods, which have a better chance of characterizing the actual fiber structure of white matter, and to warn against the misuse and misinterpretation of DTI, we review the physics of DW-MRI, indicate currently preferred methodology, and explain the limits of interpretation of its results. We conclude with a list of 'Do's and Don'ts' which define good practice in this expanding area of imaging neuroscience.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.06.081

Cites

191 of 191 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 200 references

9 of the 200 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Le Bihan, 1985, In vivo magnetic resonance imaging of diffusion I, C. R. Acad. Sci. II, 301, 1109
  2. Tournier, 2009, How many diffusion gradient directions are required for HARDI?, Proc. Int. Soc. Magn. Reson. Med., 17, 358

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 401–500 of 2,327

Metadata

Authors
Jones, D. K., Knösche, T. R., & Turner, R.
Affiliations
  • Cardiff University (GB)
  • Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences (DE)
Corresponding author
Jones, Derek K.
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-06
Volume
73
Pages
239-254
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2117987496
Cited by
2,402
References
200
Citations by year
2026: 140 · 2025: 134 · 2024: 121 · 2023: 150 · 2022: 183 · 2021: 225 · 2020: 209 · 2019: 203 · 2018: 189 · 2017: 201 · 2016: 213 · 2015: 182 · 2014: 135 · 2013: 105
FWCI
92.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • NeuroImage (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Wellcome Trust (096646/Z/11/Z)
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
diffusion-weighted imaging, diffusion tensor imaging, white matter integrity, fiber count, structural connectivity
MeSH terms
Brain, Brain Mapping, Cell Count, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Nerve Fibers, Neural Pathways, Models, Statistical, Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Diffusion Tensor 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