Cited by 457Advanced MRI Techniques and ApplicationsAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies

Head motion during MRI acquisition reduces gray matter volume and thickness estimates

Open access
Reuter, Martin, Tisdall, M. Dylan, Qureshi, Abid, Buckner, Randy L., van der Kouwe, André J.W., Fischl, Bruce·2015·NeuroImage

Abstract

Imaging biomarkers derived from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data are used to quantify normal development, disease, and the effects of disease-modifying therapies. However, motion during image acquisition introduces image artifacts that, in turn, affect derived markers. A systematic effect can be problematic since factors of interest like age, disease, and treatment are often correlated with both a structural change and the amount of head motion in the scanner, confounding the ability to distinguish biology from artifact. Here we evaluate the effect of head motion during image acquisition on morphometric estimates of structures in the human brain using several popular image analysis software packages (FreeSurfer 5.3, VBM8 SPM, and FSL Siena 5.0.7). Within-session repeated T1-weighted MRIs were collected on 12 healthy volunteers while performing different motion tasks, including two still scans. We show that volume and thickness estimates of the cortical gray matter are biased by head motion with an average apparent volume loss of roughly 0.7%/mm/min of subject motion. Effects vary across regions and remain significant after excluding scans that fail a rigorous quality check. In view of these results, the interpretation of reported morphometric effects of movement disorders or other conditions with increased motion tendency may need to be revisited: effects may be overestimated when not controlling for head motion. Furthermore, drug studies with hypnotic, sedative, tranquilizing, or neuromuscular-blocking substances may contain spurious "effects" of reduced atrophy or brain growth simply because they affect motion distinct from true effects of the disease or therapeutic process.

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.2014.12.006

Cites

33 of 33 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?

  • Strong artifacts due to motion have been noted in diffusion weighted imaging and cortical thickness measurements.

    “Strong artifacts due to motion, in addition to their relevance for fMRI, have been noted in diffusion weighted imaging (Roalf et al., 2016; Yendiki et al., 2014) and cortical thickness measurements (Reuter et al., 2015; Savalia et al., 2017).”
  • Motion tends to reduce estimates of grey-matter volume and cortical thickness and can influence observed trajectories of cortical thickness maturation.

    “Motion tends to reduce estimates of grey-matter volume and cortical thickness221 and can influence observed trajectories of cortical thickness maturation as well27.”

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. [19]Jenkinson M Measuring Transformation Error by RMS Deviation Oxford Center for Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Brain (FMRIB) 1999

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Reuter, M., Tisdall, M. D., Qureshi, A., Buckner, R. L., van der Kouwe, A. J. W., & Fischl, B.
Affiliations
Harvard University (US)
Corresponding author
Reuter, Martin
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-02
Volume
107
Pages
107-115
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2055132316
Cited by
457
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 33 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 46 · 2023: 33 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 58 · 2020: 38 · 2019: 41 · 2018: 44 · 2017: 44 · 2016: 30 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 1
FWCI
24.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • NeuroImage (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Cancer Institute (1K25-CA181632-01)
  • NIH Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01-HD071664, K99-HD074649)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R21-MH096559)
  • National Center for Research Resources (P41-RR014075, U24-RR021382, 1UL1-RR025758-01, 1S10-RR023401, 1S10-RR019307, 1S10-RR023043)
  • National Institute for Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (8P41-EB015896-15)
  • National Institute on Aging (5R01-AG008122-23, 2R01-AG016495, R21-AG046657)
  • National Institute for Neurological Disorders and Stroke (5R21-NS072652-02, 5R01-NS070963-03, 1R01-NS083534)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
Keywords
head movement, MRI artifacts, gray matter volume, cortical thickness, brain morphometry, T1-weighted imaging, FreeSurfer, imaging biomarkers
MeSH terms
Adult, Algorithms, Humans, Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Quality Control, Biomarkers, Linear Models, Artifacts, Head Movements, Gray Matter

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