Dataset Information

MRIQC: Advancing the automatic prediction of image quality in MRI from unseen sites.

ABSTRACT: Quality control of MRI is essential for excluding problematic acquisitions and avoiding bias in subsequent image processing and analysis. Visual inspection is subjective and impractical for large scale datasets. Although automated quality assessments have been demonstrated on single-site datasets, it is unclear that solutions can generalize to unseen data acquired at new sites. Here, we introduce the MRI Quality Control tool (MRIQC), a tool for extracting quality measures and fitting a binary (accept/exclude) classifier. Our tool can be run both locally and as a free online service via the OpenNeuro.org portal. The classifier is trained on a publicly available, multi-site dataset (17 sites, N = 1102). We perform model selection evaluating different normalization and feature exclusion approaches aimed at maximizing across-site generalization and estimate an accuracy of 76%±13% on new sites, using leave-one-site-out cross-validation. We confirm that result on a held-out dataset (2 sites, N = 265) also obtaining a 76% accuracy. Even though the performance of the trained classifier is statistically above chance, we show that it is susceptible to site effects and unable to account for artifacts specific to new sites. MRIQC performs with high accuracy in intra-site prediction, but performance on unseen sites leaves space for improvement which might require more labeled data and new approaches to the between-site variability. Overcoming these limitations is crucial for a more objective quality assessment of neuroimaging data, and to enable the analysis of extremely large and multi-site samples.

SUBMITTER: Esteban O

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5612458 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

MRIQC: Advancing the automatic prediction of image quality in MRI from unseen sites.

Esteban Oscar O Birman Daniel D Schaer Marie M Koyejo Oluwasanmi O OO Poldrack Russell A RA Gorgolewski Krzysztof J KJ

PloS one 20170925 9

Quality control of MRI is essential for excluding problematic acquisitions and avoiding bias in subsequent image processing and analysis. Visual inspection is subjective and impractical for large scale datasets. Although automated quality assessments have been demonstrated on single-site datasets, it is unclear that solutions can generalize to unseen data acquired at new sites. Here, we introduce the MRI Quality Control tool (MRIQC), a tool for extracting quality measures and fitting a binary (a ...[more]

PMID: 28945803

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundA variety of external factors might seriously degrade PET image quality and lead to inconsistent results. The aim of this study is to explore a potential PET image quality assessment (QA) method with deep learning (DL).MethodsA total of 89 PET images were acquired from Peking Union Medical College Hospital (PUMCH) in China in this study. Ground-truth quality for images was assessed by two senior radiologists and classified into five grades (grade 1, grade 2, grade 3, grade 4, and grade 5). Grade 5 is the best image quality. After preprocessing, the Dense Convolutional Network (DenseNet) was trained to automatically recognize optimal- and poor-quality PET images. Accuracy (ACC), sensitivity, specificity, receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC), and area under the ROC Curve (AUC) were used to evaluate the diagnostic properties of all models. All indicators of models were assessed using fivefold cross-validation. An image quality QA tool was developed based on our deep learning model. A PET QA report can be automatically obtained after inputting PET images.ResultsFour tasks were generated. Task2 showed worst performance in AUC,ACC, specificity and sensitivity among 4 tasks, and task1 showed unstable performance between training and testing and task3 showed low specificity in both training and testing. Task 4 showed the best diagnostic properties and discriminative performance between poor image quality (grade 1, grade 2) and good quality (grade 3, grade 4, grade 5) images. The automated quality assessment of task 4 showed ACC = 0.77, specificity = 0.71, and sensitivity = 0.83, in the train set; ACC = 0.85, specificity = 0.79, and sensitivity = 0.91, in the test set, respectively. The ROC measuring performance of task 4 had an AUC of 0.86 in the train set and 0.91 in the test set. The image QA tool could output basic information of images, scan and reconstruction parameters, typical instances of PET images, and deep learning score.ConclusionsThis study highlights the feasibility of the assessment of image quality in PET images using a deep learning model, which may assist with accelerating clinical research by reliably assessing image quality.

Project description:Background During simultaneous PET/MRI, flexible MRI surface coils that lay on the patient are often omitted from PET attenuation correction processing, leading to quantification bias in PET images. Purpose To identify potential PET image quality improvement by using a recently developed lightweight MRI coil technology for the anterior array (AA) surface coil in both a phantom and in vivo study. Materials and Methods A phantom study and a prospective in vivo study were performed with a PET/CT scanner under three conditions: (a) no MRI surface coil (standard of reference), (b) traditional AA coil, and (c) lightweight AA coil. AA coils were not used in attenuation correction processing to emulate clinical PET/MRI. For the phantom study, PET images were reconstructed with and without time of flight (TOF) to assess quantification accuracy and uniformity. The in vivo study consisted of 10 participants (mean age, 66 years ± 10 [standard deviation]; six men) referred for a PET/CT oncologic examination who had undergone imaging between October 2019 and February 2020. Assessment of image quantification bias (defined as the standard error of the mean values) was conducted by comparing mean liver region of interest standardized uptake values with the no-coil standard of reference. A Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to establish significance. Results For TOF and non-TOF, respectively, the phantom study revealed a mean PET quantification bias of -9.0% and -8.6% with the traditional AA coil and a mean PET quantification bias of -4.3% and -4.0% with the lightweight AA coil. The coefficients of variation reduced from 4.3% and 6.2% with the traditional AA coil to 2.1% and 2.7% with the lightweight AA coil, which demonstrated a homogeneity benefit from the lightweight coil that was greater with, versus without, TOF reconstruction. For the in vivo study, the mean liver standardized uptake value error was -5.9% with the traditional AA coil (P = .002 vs no coil) and -2.4% with the lightweight AA coil (P = .004 vs no coil). Conclusion The lightweight anterior array coil reduced PET image quantification bias by more than 50% compared with the traditional coil. Using the lightweight coil and performing time of flight-based reconstruction each reduced the variation of error. © RSNA, 2020 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Dataset Information

MRIQC: Advancing the automatic prediction of image quality in MRI from unseen sites.

Publications

MRIQC: Advancing the automatic prediction of image quality in MRI from unseen sites.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets