Open AccessMapping reliability in multicenter MRI: Voxel‐based morphometry and cortical thickness
Author(s) -
Schnack Hugo G.,
van Haren Neeltje E.M.,
Brouwer Rachel M.,
van Baal G. Caroline M.,
Picchioni Marco,
Weisbrod Matthias,
Sauer Heinrich,
Can Tyrone D.,
Huttunen Matti,
Lepage Claude,
Collins D. Louis,
Evans Alan,
Murray Robin M.,
Kahn René S.,
Hulshoff Pol Hilleke E.
Publication year - 2010
Publication title -
human brain mapping
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.005
H-Index - 191
eISSN - 1097-0193
pISSN - 1065-9471
DOI - 10.1002/hbm.20991
Subject(s) - reproducibility , statistical power , multicenter study , voxel , reliability (semiconductor) , nuclear medicine , computer science , artificial intelligence , pattern recognition (psychology) , statistics , medicine , mathematics , pathology , power (physics) , randomized controlled trial , physics , quantum mechanics
Multicenter structural MRI studies can have greater statistical power than single‐center studies. However, across‐center differences in contrast sensitivity, spatial uniformity, etc., may lead to tissue classification or image registration differences that could reduce or wholly offset the enhanced statistical power of multicenter data. Prior work has validated volumetric multicenter MRI, but robust methods for assessing reliability and power of multisite analyses with voxel‐based morphometry (VBM) and cortical thickness measurement (CORT) are not yet available. We developed quantitative methods to investigate the reproducibility of VBM and CORT to detect group differences and estimate heritability when MRI scans from different scanners running different acquisition protocols in a multicenter setup are included. The method produces brain maps displaying information such as lowest detectable effect size (or heritability) and effective number of subjects in the multicenter study. We applied the method to a five‐site multicenter calibration study using scanners from four different manufacturers, running different acquisition protocols. The reliability maps showed an overall good comparability between the sites, providing a reasonable gain in sensitivity in most parts of the brain. In large parts of the cerebrum and cortex scan pooling improved heritability estimates, with “effective‐N” values upto the theoretical maximum. For some areas, “optimal‐pool” maps indicated that leaving out a site would give better results. The reliability maps also reveal which brain regions are in any case difficult to measure reliably (e.g., around the thalamus). These tools will facilitate the design and analysis of multisite VBM and CORT studies for detecting group differences and estimating heritability. Hum Brain Mapp, 2010. © 2010 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.