↓ Skip to main content

Design and Validation of Diffusion MRI Models of White Matter

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physics, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
17 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
200 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
219 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Design and Validation of Diffusion MRI Models of White Matter
Published in
Frontiers in Physics, November 2017
DOI 10.3389/fphy.2017.00061
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ileana O. Jelescu, Matthew D. Budde

Abstract

Diffusion MRI is arguably the method of choice for characterizing white matter microstructure in vivo. Over the typical duration of diffusion encoding, the displacement of water molecules is conveniently on a length scale similar to that of the underlying cellular structures. Moreover, water molecules in white matter are largely compartmentalized which enables biologically-inspired compartmental diffusion models to characterize and quantify the true biological microstructure. A plethora of white matter models have been proposed. However, overparameterization and mathematical fitting complications encourage the introduction of simplifying assumptions that vary between different approaches. These choices impact the quantitative estimation of model parameters with potential detriments to their biological accuracy and promised specificity. First, we review biophysical white matter models in use and recapitulate their underlying assumptions and realms of applicability. Second, we present up-to-date efforts to validate parameters estimated from biophysical models. Simulations and dedicated phantoms are useful in assessing the performance of models when the ground truth is known. However, the biggest challenge remains the validation of the "biological accuracy" of estimated parameters. Complementary techniques such as microscopy of fixed tissue specimens have facilitated direct comparisons of estimates of white matter fiber orientation and densities. However, validation of compartmental diffusivities remains challenging, and complementary MRI-based techniques such as alternative diffusion encodings, compartment-specific contrast agents and metabolites have been used to validate diffusion models. Finally, white matter injury and disease pose additional challenges to modeling, which are also discussed. This review aims to provide an overview of the current state of models and their validation and to stimulate further research in the field to solve the remaining open questions and converge towards consensus.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 219 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 219 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 50 23%
Researcher 42 19%
Student > Master 22 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 19 9%
Student > Bachelor 10 5%
Other 35 16%
Unknown 41 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 51 23%
Engineering 27 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 8%
Physics and Astronomy 15 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 5%
Other 36 16%
Unknown 63 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 August 2019.
All research outputs
#4,096,344
of 25,372,398 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physics
#147
of 4,460 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,454
of 450,519 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physics
#3
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,372,398 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,460 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 450,519 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.