The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Retrospective harmonization of multi-site diffusion MRI data acquired with different acquisition parameters
Open accessAbstract
A joint and integrated analysis of multi-site diffusion MRI (dMRI) datasets can dramatically increase the statistical power of neuroimaging studies and enable comparative studies pertaining to several brain disorders. However, dMRI data sets acquired on multiple scanners cannot be naively pooled for joint analysis due to scanner specific nonlinear effects as well as differences in acquisition parameters. Consequently, for joint analysis, the dMRI data has to be harmonized, which involves removing scanner-specific differences from the raw dMRI signal. In this work, we present a dMRI harmonization method that, when applied to multi-site data, is capable of removing scanner-specific effects, while accounting for minor differences in acquisition parameters such as b-value, spatial resolution and number of gradient directions in the dMRI data (typical for multi-site clinical research scans). We validate our algorithm on dMRI data acquired from two sites: Philadelphia Neurodevelopmental Cohort (PNC) with 800 healthy adolescents (ages 8 to 22 years) and Brigham and Women’s Hospital (BWH) with 70 healthy subjects (ages 14 to 54 years). In particular, we show that gender differences and maturation in different age groups are preserved after harmonization, as measured using effect sizes (small, medium and large), irrespective of the test sample size. Further, because we use matched control subjects from different scanners to estimate scanner-specific effects, we tested how many subjects are needed from each site to achieve best harmonization results. Our results indicate that at-least 16 to 18 well-matched healthy controls from each site are needed to reliably capture scanner related differences. The proposed method can thus be used for retrospective harmonization of raw dMRI data across sites despite differences in acquisition parameters, while preserving inter-subject anatomical variability.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Gibbs-ringing artifact removal based on local subvoxel-shifts
Kellner, E., Dhital, B., Kiselev, V. G., & Reisert, M. (2016) · Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · doi:10.1002/mrm.26054 · Cited by 1,478
Microstructural maturation of the human brain from childhood to adulthood
Lebel, C., Walker, L., Leemans, A., Phillips, L., & Beaulieu, C. (2008) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.12.053 · Cited by 1,398
Gur, R. C., Turetsky, B. I., Matsui, M., Yan, M., Bilker, W., Hughett, P., & Gur, R. E. (1999) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.19-10-04065.1999 · Cited by 909
White matter development in adolescence: A DTI study
Asato, M. R., Terwilliger, R., Woo, J., & Luna, B. (2010) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhp282 · Cited by 512
Neuroimaging of the Philadelphia Neurodevelopmental Cohort
Satterthwaite, T. D., Elliott, M. A., Ruparel, K., Loughead, J., Prabhakaran, K., Calkins, M. E., Hopson, R., Jackson, C., Keefe, J., Riley, M., et al. (2014) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.07.064 · Cited by 504
Jahanshad, N., Kochunov, P. V., Sprooten, E., Mandl, R. C., Nichols, T. E., Almasy, L., Blangero, J., Brouwer, R. M., Curran, J. E., de Zubicaray, G. I., et al. (2013) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.04.061 · Cited by 393
Satterthwaite, T. D., Connolly, J. J., Ruparel, K., Calkins, M. E., Jackson, C., Elliott, M. A., Roalf, D. R., Hopson, R., Prabhakaran, K., Behr, M., et al. (2016) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.03.056 · Cited by 335
Filtered multitensor tractography
Malcolm, J. G., Shenton, M. E., & Rathi, Y. (2010) · IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging · doi:10.1109/tmi.2010.2048121 · Cited by 247
Self-citation
Cited by
Deep learning-based unlearning of dataset bias for mri harmonisation and confound removal
Dinsdale, N. K., Jenkinson, M., & Namburete, A. I. L. (2021) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.117689 · Cited by 178
The sensitivity of diffusion MRI to microstructural properties and experimental factors
Afzali, M., Pieciak, T., Newman, S., Garyfallidis, E., Özarslan, E., Cheng, H., & Jones, D. K. (2021) · Journal of Neuroscience Methods · doi:10.1016/j.jneumeth.2020.108951 · Cited by 117
Metadata
- Authors
- Cetin Karayumak, S., Bouix, S., Ning, L., James, A., Crow, T., Shenton, M., Kubicki, M., & Rathi, Y.
- Venue
- NeuroImage
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-01
- Volume
- 184
- Pages
- 180-200
- ISSN
- 1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2951944555
- Cited by
- 164
- References
- 8
- FWCI
- 9.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Retrospective harmonization of multi-site diffusion MRI data acquired with different acquisition parameters. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2018.08.073
- The paper
- Cetin Karayumak, S., Bouix, S., Ning, L., James, A., Crow, T., Shenton, M., Kubicki, M., & Rathi, Y. (2019). Retrospective harmonization of multi-site diffusion MRI data acquired with different acquisition parameters. NeuroImage. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2018.08.073
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.