4.5 Article

The Canadian Dementia Imaging Protocol: Harmonization validity for morphometry measurements

期刊

NEUROIMAGE-CLINICAL
卷 24, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.nicl.2019.101943

关键词

Neuroimaging; Magnetic resonance imaging; Standardization; Morphometry; Multi-centric studies

资金

  1. Alzheimer's Society of Canada [13-32]
  2. Canadian Institutes for Health Research [117121]
  3. Fonds de recherche du Quebec Sante/Pfizer Canada - Pfizer-FRQS Innovation Fund [25262]
  4. Fonds de recherche du Quebec -Sante/Pfizer Canada Innovation Fund [27239]
  5. Canadian Partnership Against Cancer
  6. Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
  7. Canadian Institutes of Health Research
  8. Government of Ontario
  9. Ontario Brain Institute Foundation
  10. Consortium Quebecois de Decouverte du Medicament

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The harmonized Canadian Dementia Imaging Protocol (CDIP) has been developed to suit the needs of a number of co-occurring Canadian studies collecting data on brain changes across adulthood and neurodegeneration. In this study, we verify the impact of CDIP parameters compliance on total brain volume variance using 86 scans of the same individual acquired on various scanners. Data included planned data collection acquired within the Consortium pour l'identification precoce de la maladie Alzheimer - Quebec (CIMA-Q) and Canadian Consortium on Neurodegeneration in Aging (CCNA) studies, as well as opportunistic data collection from various protocols. For images acquired from Philips scanners, lower variance in brain volumes were observed when the stated CDIP resolution was set. For images acquired from GE scanners, lower variance in brain volumes were noticed when TE/TR values were within 5% of the CDIP protocol, compared to values farther from that criteria. Together, these results suggest that a harmonized protocol like the CDIP may help to reduce neuromorphometric measurement variability in multi-centric studies.

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

4.5
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