2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.compmedimag.2010.11.007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Design and construction of a brain phantom to simulate neonatal MR images

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

1
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Huppi et al (1998) and Inder et al (2005) showed tissue class segmentation results of newborn infants using this method [59], [60]. Kazemi et al (2011) presented a neonatal brain phantom that consists of 9 different tissue types: skin, fat, muscle, skull, dura mater, gray matter, myelinated white matter, nonmyelinated white matter and cerebrospinal fluid [61].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Huppi et al (1998) and Inder et al (2005) showed tissue class segmentation results of newborn infants using this method [59], [60]. Kazemi et al (2011) presented a neonatal brain phantom that consists of 9 different tissue types: skin, fat, muscle, skull, dura mater, gray matter, myelinated white matter, nonmyelinated white matter and cerebrospinal fluid [61].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…21 Validation of MRI segmentation is difficult as the ground truth (the precise nature of the underlying anatomy) is not known although reliability and reproducibility of the FMRIB Software Library (FSL), statistical parametric mapping (SPM), and FreeSurfer have been benchmarked using human subjects. 22 Although digital phantoms are widespread for MRI, 20,23,24 they do not test the actual imaging chain as the scanner itself is simulated. Due to the difficulties in both creating and handling materials with realistic MR properties, no realistic full brain physical MRI phantoms are available.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…13 Different neonatal probabilistic atlases and a phantom were proposed for neonates. [14][15][16][17][18] A spatiotemporal nonrigid atlas was also constructed for infants (neonates, 1-and 2-year-old) in which the neonates were considered as one group in the range of 38.7 to 46.4 weeks' gestational age (GA) at the time of image acquisition. 19 Nonetheless, due to the rapid rate of change in brain structure, in both size and shape, during the first few months of life, and due to the on-going cortical folding process, it necessitates close coverage of this age range with a time-resolving, dynamic atlas.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%