The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Adaptive segmentation of MRI data
Abstract
Intensity-based classification of MR images has proven problematic, even when advanced techniques are used. Intrascan and interscan intensity inhomogeneities are a common source of difficulty. While reported methods have had some success in correcting intrascan inhomogeneities, such methods require supervision for the individual scan. This paper describes a new method called adaptive segmentation that uses knowledge of tissue intensity properties and intensity inhomogeneities to correct and segment MR images. Use of the expectation-maximization (EM) algorithm leads to a method that allows for more accurate segmentation of tissue types as well as better visualization of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data, that has proven to be effective in a study that includes more than 1000 brain scans. Implementation and results are described for segmenting the brain in the following types of images: axial (dual-echo spin-echo), coronal [three dimensional Fourier transform (3-DFT) gradient-echo T1-weighted] all using a conventional head coil, and a sagittal section acquired using a surface coil. The accuracy of adaptive segmentation was found to be comparable with manual segmentation, and closer to manual segmentation than supervised multivariant classification while segmenting gray and white matter.
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
Maximum Likelihood from Incomplete Data Via the EM Algorithm
Dempster, A. P., Laird, N. M., & Rubin, D. B. (1977) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1111/j.2517-6161.1977.tb01600.x · Cited by 50,444
Functional mapping of the human visual cortex by magnetic resonance imaging
Belliveau, J. W., Kennedy, D. N., McKinstry, R. C., Buchbinder, B. R., Weisskoff, R. M., Cohen, M. S., Vevea, J. M., Brady, T. J., & Rosen, B. R. (1991) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1948051 · Cited by 1,883
Cited by
Cortical Surface-Based Analysis
Dale, A. M., Fischl, B., & Sereno, M. I. (1999) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1006/nimg.1998.0395 · Cited by 10,910
Yushkevich, P. A., Piven, J., Hazlett, H. C., Smith, R. G., Ho, S., Gee, J. C., & Gerig, G. (2006) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.01.015 · Cited by 8,868
Fischl, B., Salat, D. H., Busa, E., Albert, M., Dieterich, M., Haselgrove, C., van der Kouwe, A., Killiany, R., Kennedy, D., Klaveness, S., et al. (2002) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/s0896-6273(02)00569-x · Cited by 8,610
Ashburner, J., & Friston, K. J. (2005) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.02.018 · Cited by 7,507
Cortical Surface-Based Analysis
Fischl, B., Sereno, M. I., & Dale, A. M. (1999) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1006/nimg.1998.0396 · Cited by 6,147
Metadata
- Authors
- Wells, W. M., Grimson, W. E. L., Kikinis, R., & Jolesz, F. A.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging
- Published
- 1996-08
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 429-442
- ISSN
- 0278-0062 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-254X
- OpenAlex
- W2162630772
- Cited by
- 1,277
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 51.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
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.