Contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) as a quality parameter in fMRI

Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Volumn 25, Issue 6, 2007, Pages 1263-1270

  Geissler, Alexander ^a   Gartus, Andreas ^a   Foki, Thomas ^a   Tahamtan, Amir Reza ^a   Beisteiner, Roland ^a   Barth, Markus ^a,b  

^a MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF VIENNA   (Austria)

^b RADBOUD UNIVERSITY NIJMEGEN   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Brain mapping; Contrast to noise; Functional MRI; Healthy subjects; Patients

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BRAIN FUNCTION; BRAIN MAPPING; CONTRAST NOISE RATIO; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; HEMODYNAMICS; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; STATISTICAL MODEL;

ADULT; BRAIN DISEASES; BRAIN MAPPING; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; QUALITY CONTROL; SIGNAL PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED;

EID: 34249870833     PISSN: 10531807     EISSN: 15222586     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jmri.20935     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Beisteiner R, Lanzenberger R, Novak K, et al. Improvement of presurgical patient evaluation by generation of functional magnetic resonance risk maps. Neurosci Lett 2000:18;290:13-16.
2. Roessler K, Donat M, Lanzenberger R, et al. Evaluation of preoperative high magnetic field motor functional MRI (3 Tesla) in glioma patients by navigated electrocortical stimulation and postoperative outcome. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2005;76:1152-1157.
3. Lanzenberger R, Wiest G, Geissler A, et al. fMRI reveals functional cortex in a case of inconclusive Wada testing. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2005;107:147-151.
4. Krings T, Reinges MH, Erberich S, et al. Functional MRI for presurgical planning: problems, artefacts, and solution strategies. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2001;70:749-760.
5. Liu TT, Frank LR, Wong EC, Buxton RB. Detection power, estimation efficiency, and predictability in event-related fMRI. Neuroimage 2001;13:759-773.
6. Geissler A, Lanzenberger R, Barth M, et al. Influence of fMRI smoothing procedures on replicability of fine scale motor localization. Neuroimage 2005;24:323-331.
7. Krings T, Topper R, Willmes K, Reinges MH, Gilsbach JM, Thron A. Activation in primary and secondary motor areas in patients with CNS neoplasms and weakness. Neurology 2002;58:381-390.
8. Parrish TB, Gitelman DR, LaBar KS, Mesulam MM. Impact of signal-to-noise on functional MRI. Magn Reson Med 2000;44:925-932.
9. Thulborn KR. Clinical rationale for very-high-field (3.0 Tesla) functional magnetic resonance imaging. Top Magn Reson Imaging 1999; 10:37-50.
10. Kruger G, Glover GH. Physiological noise in oxygenation-sensitive magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Med 2001;46: 631-637.
11. Wu G, Li SJ. Theoretical noise model for oxygenation-sensitive magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Med 2005;53:1046-1054.
12. Woods RP, Grafton ST, Watson JDG, Sicotte NL, Mazziotta JC. Automated image registration: 11. Intersubject validation of linear and nonlinear models. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1998;22:153-165.
13. Edward V, Windischberger C, Cunnington R, et al. Quantification of fMRI artifact reduction by a novel plaster cast head holder. Hum Brain Mapp 2000;11:207-213.
14. By members & collaborators of the Wellcome Department of Imaging Neuroscience: University College London, SPM2 - Statistical Parametric Mapping. http://www.fil.ion.ucl.ac.uk/spm
15. Press W, Teukolsky S, Vetterling W, et al. Numerical recipes in C: the art of scientific computing. Cambridge University Press; 1988-1992.
16. Kruger G, Kastrup A, Glover GH. Neuroimaging at 1.5 T and 3.0 T: comparison of oxygenation-sensiuve magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Med 2001;45:595-604.
17. Triantafyllou C, Hoge RD, Krueger G, et al. Comparison of physiological noise at 1.5 T, 3 T and 7 T and optimization of fMRI acquisition parameters. Neuroimage 2005;26:243-250.
18. Handwerker DA, Ollinger JM, D'Esposito M. Variation of BOLD hemodynamic responses across subjects and brain regions and their effects on statistical analyses. Neuroimage 2004;21:1639-1651.
19. Baumgartner R, Windischberger C, Moser E. Quantification in functional magnetic resonance imaging: fuzzy clustering vs. correlation analysis. Magn Reson Imaging 1998;16:115-125.
20. Dimitriadou E, Barth M, Windischberger C, Hornik K, Moser E. A quantitative comparison of functional MRI cluster analysis. Artif Intell Med 2004;31:57-71.
21. Skudlarski P, Constable RT, Gore JC. ROC analysis of statistical methods used in functional MRI: individual subjects Neuroimage 1999;9:311-329.