Literature DB >> 16304101

Reproducibility of functional MR imaging: preliminary results of prospective multi-institutional study performed by Biomedical Informatics Research Network.

Kelly H Zou1, Douglas N Greve, Meng Wang, Steven D Pieper, Simon K Warfield, Nathan S White, Sanjay Manandhar, Gregory G Brown, Mark G Vangel, Ron Kikinis, William M Wells.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To prospectively investigate the factors--including subject, brain hemisphere, study site, field strength, imaging unit vendor, imaging run, and examination visit--affecting the reproducibility of functional magnetic resonance (MR) imaging activations based on a repeated sensory-motor (SM) task.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The institutional review boards of all participating sites approved this HIPAA-compliant study. All subjects gave informed consent. Functional MR imaging data were repeatedly acquired from five healthy men aged 20-29 years who performed the same SM task at 10 sites. Five 1.5-T MR imaging units, four 3.0-T units, and one 4.0-T unit were used. The subjects performed bilateral finger tapping on button boxes with a 3-Hz audio cue and a reversing checkerboard. In a block design, 15-second epochs of alternating baseline and tasks yielded 85 acquisitions per run. Functional MR images were acquired with block-design echo-planar or spiral gradient-echo sequences. Brain activation maps standardized in a unit-sphere for the left and right hemispheres of each subject were constructed. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve, intraclass correlation coefficients, multiple regression analysis, and paired Student t tests were used for statistical analyses.
RESULTS: Significant factors were subject (P < .005), k-space (P < .005), and field strength (P = .02) for sensitivity and subject (P = .03) and k-space (P = .05) for specificity. At 1.5-T MR imaging, mean sensitivities ranged from 7% to 32% and mean specificities were higher than 99%. At 3.0 T, mean sensitivities and specificities ranged from 42% to 85% and from 96% to 99%, respectively. At 4.0 T, mean sensitivities and specificities ranged from 41% to 73% and from 95% to 99%, respectively. Mean areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (+/- their standard errors) were 0.77 +/- 0.05 at 1.5 T, 0.90 +/- 0.09 at 3.0 T, and 0.95 +/- 0.02 at 4.0 T, with significant differences between the 1.5- and 3.0-T examinations and between the 1.5- and 4.0-T examinations (P < .01 for both comparisons). Intraclass correlation coefficients ranged from 0.49 to 0.71.
CONCLUSION: MR imaging at 3.0- and 4.0-T yielded higher reproducibility across sites and significantly better results than 1.5-T imaging. The effects of subject, k-space, and field strength on examination reproducibility were significant. RSNA, 2005

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16304101      PMCID: PMC1351264          DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2373041630

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  29 in total

1.  Thresholding of statistical maps in functional neuroimaging using the false discovery rate.

Authors:  Christopher R Genovese; Nicole A Lazar; Thomas Nichols
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 6.556

2.  Single-trial variability in event-related BOLD signals.

Authors:  Jeng-Ren Duann; Tzyy-Ping Jung; Wen-Jui Kuo; Tzu-Chen Yeh; Scott Makeig; Jen-Chuen Hsieh; Terrence J Sejnowski
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 6.556

3.  Reproducibility of the hemodynamic response to auditory oddball stimuli: a six-week test-retest study.

Authors:  Kent A Kiehl; Peter F Liddle
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 5.038

4.  Receiver operating characteristic curves and their use in radiology.

Authors:  Nancy A Obuchowski
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Test-retest reliability estimation of functional MRI data.

Authors:  Ranjan Maitra; Steven R Roys; Rao P Gullapalli
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 4.668

6.  Habituation of rostral anterior cingulate cortex to repeated emotionally salient pictures.

Authors:  K Luan Phan; Israel Liberzon; Robert C Welsh; Jennifer C Britton; Stephan F Taylor
Journal:  Neuropsychopharmacology       Date:  2003-04-23       Impact factor: 7.853

Review 7.  Correlation and simple linear regression.

Authors:  Kelly H Zou; Kemal Tuncali; Stuart G Silverman
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  Within-subject variability of BOLD response dynamics.

Authors:  Jane Neumann; Gabriele Lohmann; Stefan Zysset; D Yves von Cramon
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 6.556

9.  Functional MRI of auditory verbal working memory: long-term reproducibility analysis.

Authors:  Xingchang Wei; Seung-Schik Yoo; Chandlee C Dickey; Kelly H Zou; Charles R G Guttmann; Lawrence P Panych
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 6.556

10.  Statistical validation based on parametric receiver operating characteristic analysis of continuous classification data.

Authors:  Kelly H Zou; Simon K Warfield; Julia R Fielding; Clare M C Tempany; M Wells William; Michael R Kaus; Ferenc A Jolesz; Ron Kikinis
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 3.173

View more
  46 in total

1.  Multi-site characterization of an fMRI working memory paradigm: reliability of activation indices.

Authors:  Anastasia Yendiki; Douglas N Greve; Stuart Wallace; Mark Vangel; Jeremy Bockholt; Bryon A Mueller; Vince Magnotta; Nancy Andreasen; Dara S Manoach; Randy L Gollub
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2010-05-05       Impact factor: 6.556

Review 2.  A systematic review of the utility of 1.5 versus 3 Tesla magnetic resonance brain imaging in clinical practice and research.

Authors:  Joanna M Wardlaw; Will Brindle; Ana M Casado; Kirsten Shuler; Moira Henderson; Brenda Thomas; Jennifer Macfarlane; Susana Muñoz Maniega; Katherine Lymer; Zoe Morris; Cyril Pernet; William Nailon; Trevor Ahearn; Abdul Nashirudeen Mumuni; Carlos Mugruza; John McLean; Goultchira Chakirova; Yuehui Terry Tao; Johanna Simpson; Andrew C Stanfield; Harriet Johnston; Jehill Parikh; Natalie A Royle; Janet De Wilde; Mark E Bastin; Nick Weir; Andrew Farrall; Maria C Valdes Hernandez
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2012-06-09       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  Measurement of Signal-to-Noise and Contrast-to-Noise in the fBIRN Multicenter Imaging Study.

Authors:  Vincent A Magnotta; Lee Friedman
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 4.056

Review 4.  Function biomedical informatics research network recommendations for prospective multicenter functional MRI studies.

Authors:  Gary H Glover; Bryon A Mueller; Jessica A Turner; Theo G M van Erp; Thomas T Liu; Douglas N Greve; James T Voyvodic; Jerod Rasmussen; Gregory G Brown; David B Keator; Vince D Calhoun; Hyo Jong Lee; Judith M Ford; Daniel H Mathalon; Michele Diaz; Daniel S O'Leary; Syam Gadde; Adrian Preda; Kelvin O Lim; Cynthia G Wible; Hal S Stern; Aysenil Belger; Gregory McCarthy; Burak Ozyurt; Steven G Potkin
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2012-02-07       Impact factor: 4.813

5.  Sources of variability in MEG.

Authors:  Wanmei Ou; Polina Golland; Matti Hämäläinen
Journal:  Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv       Date:  2007

6.  Test-retest and between-site reliability in a multicenter fMRI study.

Authors:  Lee Friedman; Hal Stern; Gregory G Brown; Daniel H Mathalon; Jessica Turner; Gary H Glover; Randy L Gollub; John Lauriello; Kelvin O Lim; Tyrone Cannon; Douglas N Greve; Henry Jeremy Bockholt; Aysenil Belger; Bryon Mueller; Michael J Doty; Jianchun He; William Wells; Padhraic Smyth; Steve Pieper; Seyoung Kim; Marek Kubicki; Mark Vangel; Steven G Potkin
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 5.038

Review 7.  Current trends and challenges in MRI acquisitions to investigate brain function.

Authors:  Bradley P Sutton; Cheng Ouyang; Dimitrios C Karampinos; Gregory A Miller
Journal:  Int J Psychophysiol       Date:  2009-02-21       Impact factor: 2.997

8.  Automated classification of fMRI data employing trial-based imagery tasks.

Authors:  Jong-Hwan Lee; Matthew Marzelli; Ferenc A Jolesz; Seung-Schik Yoo
Journal:  Med Image Anal       Date:  2009-01-16       Impact factor: 8.545

9.  Task-modulated coactivation of vergence neural substrates.

Authors:  Rajbir Jaswal; Suril Gohel; Bharat B Biswal; Tara L Alvarez
Journal:  Brain Connect       Date:  2014-06-19

10.  Neural correlates of three types of negative life events during angry face processing in adolescents.

Authors:  Fanny Gollier-Briant; Marie-Laure Paillère-Martinot; Hervé Lemaitre; Ruben Miranda; Hélène Vulser; Robert Goodman; Jani Penttilä; Maren Struve; Tahmine Fadai; Viola Kappel; Luise Poustka; Yvonne Grimmer; Uli Bromberg; Patricia Conrod; Tobias Banaschewski; Gareth J Barker; Arun L W Bokde; Christian Büchel; Herta Flor; Juergen Gallinat; Hugh Garavan; Andreas Heinz; Claire Lawrence; Karl Mann; Frauke Nees; Tomas Paus; Zdenka Pausova; Vincent Frouin; Marcella Rietschel; Trevor W Robbins; Michael N Smolka; Gunter Schumann; Jean-Luc Martinot; Eric Artiges
Journal:  Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci       Date:  2016-10-03       Impact factor: 3.436

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.