Correcting power and p-value calculations for bias in diffusion tensor imaging

Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Volumn 31, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 857-864

  Lauzon, Carolyn B ^a,b   Landman, Bennett A ^a,b  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Bias; DTI; FA; Power; SIMEX; Type I error rate

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ARTICLE; BRAIN MAPPING; DIFFUSION TENSOR IMAGING; EFFECT SIZE; FEASIBILITY STUDY; FRACTIONAL ANISOTROPY; POWER ANALYSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; SIMULATION; STATISTICAL MODEL; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; VALIDITY;

ALGORITHMS; ARTIFACTS; BRAIN; DIFFUSION TENSOR IMAGING; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 84878630036     PISSN: 0730725X     EISSN: 18735894     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.mri.2013.01.002     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Basser P.J., Jones D.K. Diffusion-tensor MRI: theory, experimental design and data analysis - a technical review. NMR Biomed 2002, 15(7-8):456-467.
2. Khurd P., Verma R., Davatzikos C. Kernel-based manifold learning for statistical analysis of diffusion tensor images. Inf Process Med Imaging 2007, 20:581-593.
3. Mori S., et al. Three-dimensional tracking of axonal projections in the brain by magnetic resonance imaging. Ann Neurol 1999, 45(2):265-269.
4. Farrell J.A., et al. Effects of signal-to-noise ratio on the accuracy and reproducibility of diffusion tensor imaging-derived fractional anisotropy, mean diffusivity, and principal eigenvector measurements at 1.5 T. J Magn Reson Imaging 2007, 26(3):756-767.
5. Anderson A.W. Theoretical analysis of the effects of noise on diffusion tensor imaging. Magn Reson Med 2001, 46(6):1174-1188.
6. Landman B.A., et al. Effects of diffusion weighting schemes on the reproducibility of DTI-derived fractional anisotropy, mean diffusivity, and principal eigenvector measurements at 1.5T. Neuroimage 2007, 36(4):1123-1138.
7. Jones D.K. The effect of gradient sampling schemes on measures derived from diffusion tensor MRI: a Monte Carlo study. Magn Reson Med 2004, 51(4):807-815.
8. Koay C.G., Basser P.J. Analytically exact correction scheme for signal extraction from noisy magnitude MR signals. J Magn Reson 2006, 179(2):317-322.
9. Koay C.G., et al. Investigation of anomalous estimates of tensor-derived quantities in diffusion tensor imaging. Magn Reson Med 2006, 55(4):930-936.
10. Koay C.G., et al. A unifying theoretical and algorithmic framework for least squares methods of estimation in diffusion tensor imaging. J Magn Reson 2006, 182(1):115-125.
11. Landman B.A., et al. Diffusion tensor imaging at low SNR: nonmonotonic behaviors of tensor contrasts. Magn Reson Imaging 2008.
12. Jones D.K., Basser P.J. "Squashing peanuts and smashing pumpkins": how noise distorts diffusion-weighted MR data. Magn Reson Med 2004, 52(5):979-993.
13. Jones D.K., Cercignani M. Twenty-five pitfalls in the analysis of diffusion MRI data. NMR Biomed 2010, 23(7):803-820.
14. Jones D.K. Precision and accuracy in diffusion tensor magnetic resonance imaging. Top Magn Reson Imaging 2010, 21(2):87-99.
15. Jones D.K., Leemans A. Diffusion tensor imaging. Methods Mol Biol 2011, 711:127-144.
16. Bastin M.E., Armitage P.A., Marshall I. A theoretical study of the effect of experimental noise on the measurement of anisotropy in diffusion imaging. Magn Reson Imaging 1998, 16(7):773-785.
17. Batchelor P.G., et al. Anisotropic noise propagation in diffusion tensor MRI sampling schemes. Magn Reson Med 2003, 49(6):1143-1151.
18. Chen B., Hsu E.W. Noise removal in magnetic resonance diffusion tensor imaging. Magn Reson Med 2005, 54(2):393-401.
19. Kingsley P.B., Monahan W.G. Contrast-to-noise ratios of diffusion anisotropy indices. Magn Reson Med 2005, 53(4):911-918.
20. Landman B.A., Bazin P.L., Prince J.L. Estimation and application of spatially variable noise fields in diffusion tensor imaging. Magn Reson Imaging 2009, 27(6):741-751.
21. Gudbjartsson H., Patz S. The Rician distribution of noisy MRI data. Magn Reson Med 1995, 34(6):910-914.
22. Sijbers J. Signal and noise estimation from magnetic resonance images 1998, University of Antwerp, Antwerpen, Belgium.
23. Jones D.K., Diffusion M.R.I. theory, methods, and application 2010, Oxford University Press, Oxford (NY), xvi, 767 p.
24. Lauzon C.B., et al. Assessment of bias in experimentally measured diffusion tensor imaging parameters using SIMEX. Magn Reson Med 2012, 10.1002/mrm.24324.
25. Carroll R.J., et al. Measurement error in nonlinear models: a modern perspective. 2nd ed 2006, Chapman and Hall/CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL USA.
26. Cook J.R., Stefanski L.A. Simulation-extrapolation estimation in parametric measurement error models. J Am Stat Assoc 1994, 1314-1328.
27. Constantinides C.D., Atalar E., McVeigh E.R. Signal-to-noise measurements in magnitude images from NMR phased arrays. Magn Reson Med 1997, 38(5):852-857.
28. Landman B.A., et al. Robust estimation of spatially variable noise fields. Magn Reson Med 2009, 62(2):500-509.
29. Anderson S., et al. Statistical methods for comparative studies: techniques for bias reduction. 1st ed. 1980, Wiley-Interscience, New York, NY, USA.
30. Landman B.A., et al. Multi-parametric neuroimaging reproducibility: a 3T resource study. Neuroimage 2010, 54(4):2854-2866.
31. Lehmbeck J.T., et al. Combining voxel-based morphometry and diffusion tensor imaging to detect age-related brain changes. Neuroreport 2006, 17(5):467-470.
32. Padovani A., et al. Diffusion tensor imaging and voxel based morphometry study in early progressive supranuclear palsy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2006, 77(4):457-463.
33. Rohde G.K., Aldroubi A., Dawant B.M. The adaptive bases algorithm for intensity-based nonrigid image registration. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2003, 22(11):1470-1479.
34. Lucas B.C., et al. The Java Image Science Toolkit (JIST) for rapid prototyping and publishing of neuroimaging software. Neuroinformatics 2010, 8(1):5-17.
35. Friston K.J. Statistical parametric mapping: the analysis of functional brain images 2007, Academic Press, London, UK.
36. Yücel M., et al. Hemispheric and gender-related differences in the gross morphology of the anterior cingulate/paracingulate cortex in normal volunteers: an MRI morphometric study. Cereb Cortex 2001, 11(1):17.
37. Westerhausen R., et al. The influence of handedness and gender on the microstructure of the human corpus callosum: a diffusion-tensor magnetic resonance imaging study. Neurosci Lett 2003, 351(2):99-102.