Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39440570›Full record

ArticleHuman brain mapping2024

Inter-Software Consistency on the Estimation of Subcortical Structure Volume in Different Age Groups.

Lei Zhang, Yang Hu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human brain mapping, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Lei ZhangSchool of Government, Shanghai University of Political Science and Law, Shanghai, China.
Yang HuIndependent Researcher.ORCID 0000-0002-7342-8687

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is still little research on the consistency among the subcortical volume estimates of different software packages. It is also unclear whether there are age-related differences in the inter-software consistency. The current study aimed to examine the consistency of three commonly used automated software packages and the effect of age on inter-software consistency. We analyzed T1-weighted structural images from two public datasets, in which the subjects were divided into four age groups ranging from childhood and adolescence to late adulthood. We chose three mainstream automated software packages including FreeSurfer, CAT, and FSL, to estimate the volumes of seven subcortical structures, including thalamus, caudate, putamen, pallidum, hippocampus, amygdala, and accumbens. We used the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Pearson correlation coefficient (PCC) to quantify inter-software consistency and compared the consistency measures among the age groups. As a measure of validity, we additionally evaluated the predictive power of each software package's estimates for predicting age. The results showed good inter-software consistency in the thalamus, caudate, putamen, and hippocampus, moderate consistency in the pallidum, and poor consistency in the amygdala and accumbens. Significant differences in the inter-software consistency were not observed among the age groups in most cases. FreeSurfer exhibited higher age prediction accuracy than CAT and FSL. The current study showed that the inter-software consistency on the subcortical volume estimation varies with structures but generally not with age groups, which has important implications for the interpretation and reproducibility of neuroimaging findings.

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingSoftwareAdolescentAdultAgedAge FactorsAgingBrainChildFemaleHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMaleMiddle AgedNeuroimagingReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID39440570
PMCPMC11496994

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.