The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Validation Study of Multicenter Diffusion Tensor Imaging: Reliability of Fractional Anisotropy and Diffusivity Values
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: DTI is increasingly being used as a measure to study tissue damage in several neurologic diseases. Our aim was to investigate the comparability of DTI measures between different MR imaging magnets and platforms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two healthy volunteers underwent DTI on five 3T MR imaging scanners (3 Trios and 2 Signas) by using a matched 33 noncollinear diffusion-direction pulse sequence. Within each subject, a total of 16 white matter (corpus callosum, periventricular, and deep white matter) and gray matter (cortical and deep gray) ROIs were drawn on a single image set and then were coregistered to the other images. Mean FA, ADC, and longitudinal and transverse diffusivities were calculated within each ROI. Concordance correlations were derived by comparing ROI DTI values among each of the 5 magnets. RESULTS: Mean concordance for FA was 0.96; for both longitudinal and transverse diffusivities, it was 0.93; and for ADC, it was 0.88. Mean scan-rescan concordance was 0.96-0.97 for all DTI measures. Concordance correlations within platforms were, in general, better than those between platforms for all DTI measures (mean concordance of 0.96). CONCLUSIONS: We found that a 3T magnet and high-angular-resolution pulse sequence yielded comparable DTI measurements across different MR imaging magnets and platforms. Our results indicate that FA is the most comparable measure across magnets, followed by individual diffusivities. The comparability of DTI measures between different magnets supports the feasibility of multicentered clinical trials by using DTI as an outcome measure.
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.
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?
In the citing paper
“Although two different scanners were used (Siemens model Trio; scanner 1 = 285 subjects, 95.6 %; and scanner 2 = 13 subjects, 4.4 %), previous studies with this dataset have pointed out that this variability is negligible (Dickerson et al., 2008; Fox et al., 2012; Melzer et al., 2020; Noble et al., 2017a; Noble et al., 2017b; Zhou et al., 2018).”
From Multiclass characterization of frontotemporal dementia variants via multimodal brain network computational inference (2023) · cites this paper as Fox et al., 2012
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
A Method for Registration of 3-D Shapes
Besl, P., & Mckay, N. D. (1992) · IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1109/34.121791 · Cited by 22,163
Numerical recipes in C: the art of scientific computing
(1993) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.30-5638 · Cited by 17,933
Numerical recipes in Pascal: the art of scientific computing
(1990) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.27-5158 · Cited by 12,040
Basser, P. J., & Pierpaoli, C. (1996) · Journal of Magnetic Resonance, Series B · doi:10.1006/jmrb.1996.0086 · Cited by 4,306
Estimation of the Effective Self-Diffusion Tensor from the NMR Spin Echo
Basser, P. J., Mattiello, J., & Bihan, D. L. (1994) · Journal of Magnetic Resonance Series B · doi:10.1006/jmrb.1994.1037 · Cited by 3,656
Toward a quantitative assessment of diffusion anisotropy
Pierpaoli, C. M., & Basser, P. J. (1996) · Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · doi:10.1002/mrm.1910360612 · Cited by 2,392
Jones, D. K. (2004) · Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · doi:10.1002/mrm.20033 · Cited by 794
Diffusion tensor imaging of lesions and normal-appearing white matter in multiple sclerosis
Werring, D. J., Clark, C. A., Barker, G. J., Thompson, A. J., & Miller, D. H. (1999) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/wnl.52.8.1626 · Cited by 621
A Note on the Concordance Correlation Coefficient
Steichen, T. J., & Cox, N. J. (2002) · The Stata Journal Promoting communications on statistics and Stata · doi:10.1177/1536867x0200200206 · Cited by 430
Investigation of MS normal-appearing brain using diffusion tensor MRI with clinical correlations
Ciccarelli, O., Werring, D. J., Wheeler‐Kingshott, C. A. M. G., Barker, G. J., Parker, G. J. M., Thompson, A. J., & Miller, D. H. (2001) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/wnl.56.7.926 · Cited by 342
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Clinical trials in progressive multiple sclerosis: lessons learned and future perspectives
Ontaneda, D., Fox, R. J., & Chataway, J. (2015) · The Lancet Neurology · doi:10.1016/s1474-4422(14)70264-9 · Cited by 223
Self-citationGadie, A., Shafto, M. A., Leng, Y., Cam-CAN, & Kievit, R. (2017) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014920 · Cited by 224
A large-scale multicentre cerebral diffusion tensor imaging study in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis
Müller, H.-P., Turner, M. R., Großkreutz, J., Abrahams, S., Bede, P., Govind, V., Prudlo, J., Ludolph, A. C., Filippi, M., & Kassubek, J. (2016) · Journal of Neurology Neurosurgery & Psychiatry · doi:10.1136/jnnp-2015-311952 · Cited by 176
A purely confirmatory replication study of structural brain-behavior correlations
Boekel, W., Wagenmakers, E., Belay, L., Verhagen, J., Brown, S. D., & Forstmann, B. U. (2015) · Cortex · doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2014.11.019 · Cited by 175
Tamnes, C. K., Roalf, D. R., Goddings, A., & Lebel, C. A. (2017) · Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1016/j.dcn.2017.12.002 · Cited by 164
Metadata
- Authors
- Fox, R. J., Sakaie, K., Lee, J.-C., Debbins, J. P., Liu, Y., Arnold, D. L., Melhem, E. R., Smith, C. H., Philips, M. D., Lowe, M., & Fisher, E.
- Affiliations
- Montreal Neurological Institute and Hospital (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Fox, R.J.
- Venue
- American Journal of Neuroradiology
- Published
- 2011-12-15
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 695-700
- ISSN
- 0195-6108 (ISSN-L)
- 1936-959X
- PMC
- PMC8050446
- OpenAlex
- W2321691898
- Cited by
- 137
- References
- 27
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 4.88
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- American Journal of Neuroradiology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Multiple Sclerosis Society
- Biogen
- Teva Pharmaceutical Industries
- National Institutes of Health
- Genentech
- National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (K23 NS 47211, K23NS047211)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
- Keywords
- diffusion tensor imaging, fractional anisotropy, apparent diffusion coefficient, inter-scanner reproducibility, white matter, gray matter, high angular resolution diffusion MRI, 3T MRI
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Brain, Equipment Design, Humans, Image Enhancement, Male, Ohio, Sensitivity and Specificity, Reproducibility of Results, Anisotropy, Equipment Failure Analysis, Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging
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
