A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Scan-rescan reliability assessment of brain volumetric analysis across scanners and software solutions. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Automated brain volumetry shows promise in improving the screening and monitoring of neurodegenerative diseases. However, the reliability of measurements across different scanners and software remains uncertain. This study assessed the reliability of gray matter, white matter, and total brain volume measurements from seven volumetry tools, using six scanners across two scanning sessions, performed within 2 h the same day, in twelve subjects. Generalised estimating equations models showed significant effects of both software and scanner on all measurements with stronger effect of software (p < 0.001). Percentage of coefficient of variation (CV) was calculated to measure scan-rescan reliability. Median CV across scanners of AssemblyNet and AIRAscore was less than 0.2% for grey and white matter, and 0.09% for total brain volume; while FreeSurfer, FastSurfer, syngo.via, SPM12, and Vol2Brain had a CV greater than 0.2%. In Bland-Altman analysis there was no systematic difference, but limits of agreement differed greatly between methods. Based on these findings, we recommend using the same scanner and software combination across sessions to ensure that observed changes in brain volume are reliable and clinically valuable.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12354914PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-15283-3DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

scanners software
8
scan-rescan reliability
4
reliability assessment
4
assessment brain
4
brain volumetric
4
volumetric analysis
4
analysis scanners
4
software
4
software solutions
4
solutions automated
4

Similar Publications