TUTCRIS - Tampereen teknillinen yliopisto

TUTCRIS

To exclude or not to exclude: White matter hyperintensities in diffusion tensor imaging research

Tutkimustuotosvertaisarvioitu

Standard

To exclude or not to exclude : White matter hyperintensities in diffusion tensor imaging research. / Iverson, Grant L.; Hakulinen, Ullamari; Wäljas, Minna; Dastidar, Prasun; Lange, Rael T.; Soimakallio, Seppo; Öhman, Juha.

julkaisussa: BRAIN INJURY, Vuosikerta 25, Nro 13-14, 12.2011, s. 1325-1332.

Tutkimustuotosvertaisarvioitu

Harvard

Iverson, GL, Hakulinen, U, Wäljas, M, Dastidar, P, Lange, RT, Soimakallio, S & Öhman, J 2011, 'To exclude or not to exclude: White matter hyperintensities in diffusion tensor imaging research', BRAIN INJURY, Vuosikerta. 25, Nro 13-14, Sivut 1325-1332. https://doi.org/10.3109/02699052.2011.608409

APA

Iverson, G. L., Hakulinen, U., Wäljas, M., Dastidar, P., Lange, R. T., Soimakallio, S., & Öhman, J. (2011). To exclude or not to exclude: White matter hyperintensities in diffusion tensor imaging research. BRAIN INJURY, 25(13-14), 1325-1332. https://doi.org/10.3109/02699052.2011.608409

Vancouver

Iverson GL, Hakulinen U, Wäljas M, Dastidar P, Lange RT, Soimakallio S et al. To exclude or not to exclude: White matter hyperintensities in diffusion tensor imaging research. BRAIN INJURY. 2011 joulu;25(13-14):1325-1332. https://doi.org/10.3109/02699052.2011.608409

Author

Iverson, Grant L. ; Hakulinen, Ullamari ; Wäljas, Minna ; Dastidar, Prasun ; Lange, Rael T. ; Soimakallio, Seppo ; Öhman, Juha. / To exclude or not to exclude : White matter hyperintensities in diffusion tensor imaging research. Julkaisussa: BRAIN INJURY. 2011 ; Vuosikerta 25, Nro 13-14. Sivut 1325-1332.

Bibtex - Lataa

@article{edb803aea1fe494ebc2b9b26fe5f90a7,
title = "To exclude or not to exclude: White matter hyperintensities in diffusion tensor imaging research",
abstract = "Objective: A practical methodological issue for diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) researchers is determining what to do about incidental findings, such as white matter hyperintensities (WMHI). The purpose of this study was to compare healthy control subjects with or without WMHIs on whole brain DTI. Method: Participants were 30 subjects (age=37.7, SD=11.3, Range=18-60; 70{\%} female) who had no known developmental, general medical, neurological or psychiatric condition that could have had an adverse affect on brain morphology. Results: MRI (3 Tesla) revealed, at minimum, a WMHI in eight subjects (26.7{\%}). Fractional anisotropy (FA) was calculated for 19 regions of interest (ROI). Frequency distributions of FA scores for the 19 ROIs were calculated. The 10th percentile for each ROI was selected as a cut-off score. Having four or more low FA scores occurred in 16.7{\%}. More subjects with incidental findings met criterion for low FA scores (37.5{\%}), compared to 9.1{\%} of subjects with no findings. When subjects with minor WMHIs were retained and only those with multiple incidental findings were excluded, 8.3{\%} of the retained subjects met criterion for low FA scores compared to 50.0{\%} of the excluded subjects. Conclusions: The decision to include or exclude subjects who have incidental findings can influence the results of a study.",
keywords = "Diffusion tensor imaging, Methodology, Traumatic brain injury",
author = "Iverson, {Grant L.} and Ullamari Hakulinen and Minna W{\"a}ljas and Prasun Dastidar and Lange, {Rael T.} and Seppo Soimakallio and Juha {\"O}hman",
year = "2011",
month = "12",
doi = "10.3109/02699052.2011.608409",
language = "English",
volume = "25",
pages = "1325--1332",
journal = "BRAIN INJURY",
issn = "0269-9052",
publisher = "Taylor & Francis",
number = "13-14",

}

RIS (suitable for import to EndNote) - Lataa

TY - JOUR

T1 - To exclude or not to exclude

T2 - White matter hyperintensities in diffusion tensor imaging research

AU - Iverson, Grant L.

AU - Hakulinen, Ullamari

AU - Wäljas, Minna

AU - Dastidar, Prasun

AU - Lange, Rael T.

AU - Soimakallio, Seppo

AU - Öhman, Juha

PY - 2011/12

Y1 - 2011/12

N2 - Objective: A practical methodological issue for diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) researchers is determining what to do about incidental findings, such as white matter hyperintensities (WMHI). The purpose of this study was to compare healthy control subjects with or without WMHIs on whole brain DTI. Method: Participants were 30 subjects (age=37.7, SD=11.3, Range=18-60; 70% female) who had no known developmental, general medical, neurological or psychiatric condition that could have had an adverse affect on brain morphology. Results: MRI (3 Tesla) revealed, at minimum, a WMHI in eight subjects (26.7%). Fractional anisotropy (FA) was calculated for 19 regions of interest (ROI). Frequency distributions of FA scores for the 19 ROIs were calculated. The 10th percentile for each ROI was selected as a cut-off score. Having four or more low FA scores occurred in 16.7%. More subjects with incidental findings met criterion for low FA scores (37.5%), compared to 9.1% of subjects with no findings. When subjects with minor WMHIs were retained and only those with multiple incidental findings were excluded, 8.3% of the retained subjects met criterion for low FA scores compared to 50.0% of the excluded subjects. Conclusions: The decision to include or exclude subjects who have incidental findings can influence the results of a study.

AB - Objective: A practical methodological issue for diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) researchers is determining what to do about incidental findings, such as white matter hyperintensities (WMHI). The purpose of this study was to compare healthy control subjects with or without WMHIs on whole brain DTI. Method: Participants were 30 subjects (age=37.7, SD=11.3, Range=18-60; 70% female) who had no known developmental, general medical, neurological or psychiatric condition that could have had an adverse affect on brain morphology. Results: MRI (3 Tesla) revealed, at minimum, a WMHI in eight subjects (26.7%). Fractional anisotropy (FA) was calculated for 19 regions of interest (ROI). Frequency distributions of FA scores for the 19 ROIs were calculated. The 10th percentile for each ROI was selected as a cut-off score. Having four or more low FA scores occurred in 16.7%. More subjects with incidental findings met criterion for low FA scores (37.5%), compared to 9.1% of subjects with no findings. When subjects with minor WMHIs were retained and only those with multiple incidental findings were excluded, 8.3% of the retained subjects met criterion for low FA scores compared to 50.0% of the excluded subjects. Conclusions: The decision to include or exclude subjects who have incidental findings can influence the results of a study.

KW - Diffusion tensor imaging

KW - Methodology

KW - Traumatic brain injury

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=81255144004&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3109/02699052.2011.608409

DO - 10.3109/02699052.2011.608409

M3 - Article

VL - 25

SP - 1325

EP - 1332

JO - BRAIN INJURY

JF - BRAIN INJURY

SN - 0269-9052

IS - 13-14

ER -