quantitative comparison of spm, fsl, and brainsuite for brain mr image segmentation
Clicks: 455
ID: 192513
2014
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Popular Article
30.0
/100
455 views
51 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
PopularRanked #4 of 36 articles by views in The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Background: Accurate brain tissue segmentation from magnetic resonance (MR)
images is an important step in analysis of cerebral images. There are software packages
which are used for brain segmentation. These packages usually contain a set of skull
stripping, intensity non-uniformity (bias) correction and segmentation routines. Thus,
assessment of the quality of the segmented gray matter (GM), white matter (WM) and
cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) is needed for the neuroimaging applications.
Methods: In this paper, performance evaluation of three widely used brain segmentation
software packages SPM8, FSL and Brainsuite is presented. Segmentation with
SPM8 has been performed in three frameworks: i) default segmentation, ii) SPM8
New-segmentation and iii) modified version using hidden Markov random field as
implemented in SPM8-VBM toolbox.
Results: The accuracy of the segmented GM, WM and CSF and the robustness of
the tools against changes of image quality has been assessed using Brainweb simulated
MR images and IBSR real MR images. The calculated similarity between the segmented
tissues using different tools and corresponding ground truth shows variations
in segmentation results.
Conclusion: A few studies has investigated GM, WM and CSF segmentation. In
these studies, the skull stripping and bias correction are performed separately and they
just evaluated the segmentation. Thus, in this study, assessment of complete segmentation
framework consisting of pre-processing and segmentation of these packages is
performed. The obtained results can assist the users in choosing an appropriate segmentation
software package for the neuroimaging application of interest.
| Reference Key |
k2014journalquantitative
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | ;Kazemi K; Noorizadeh N |
| Journal | The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience |
| Year | 2014 |
| DOI |
DOI not found
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.