4.7 Article

The brain imaging data structure, a format for organizing and describing outputs of neuroimaging experiments

期刊

SCIENTIFIC DATA
卷 3, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/sdata.2016.44

关键词

-

资金

  1. International Neuroinformatics Coordinating Facility (INCF)
  2. Laura and John Arnold Foundation
  3. NIH [P20GM103472]
  4. Wellcome Trust
  5. NIH NIAAA [1 U01 AA021697]
  6. NIH NIAAA OD [1 U01 AA021697-04S1]
  7. Intramural Research Program of the NIMH
  8. German federal state of Sachsen-Anhalt
  9. European Regional Development Fund (ERDF)
  10. Medical Research Council (United Kingdom) [MC-A060-53144]
  11. NSF [1429999]
  12. MRC [MC_U105579212] Funding Source: UKRI
  13. Medical Research Council [MC_U105579212] Funding Source: researchfish
  14. Wellcome Trust [100309/A/12/Z] Funding Source: researchfish
  15. Div Of Information & Intelligent Systems
  16. Direct For Computer & Info Scie & Enginr [1429999] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The development of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) techniques has defined modern neuroimaging. Since its inception, tens of thousands of studies using techniques such as functional MRI and diffusion weighted imaging have allowed for the non-invasive study of the brain. Despite the fact that MRI is routinely used to obtain data for neuroscience research, there has been no widely adopted standard for organizing and describing the data collected in an imaging experiment. This renders sharing and reusing data (within or between labs) difficult if not impossible and unnecessarily complicates the application of automatic pipelines and quality assurance protocols. To solve this problem, we have developed the Brain Imaging Data Structure (BIDS), a standard for organizing and describing MRI datasets. The BIDS standard uses file formats compatible with existing software, unifies the majority of practices already common in the field, and captures the metadata necessary for most common data processing operations.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据