使用外部数据集自动测量脊髓损伤中矢状面组织桥的scieg的可靠性。

IF 2.4 Q1 REHABILITATION
Topics in Spinal Cord Injury Rehabilitation Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2025-06-19 DOI:10.46292/sci25-00015
J R Connor, W A Thornton, K A Weber, D Pfyffer, P Freund, C Tefertiller, A C Smith
{"title":"使用外部数据集自动测量脊髓损伤中矢状面组织桥的scieg的可靠性。","authors":"J R Connor, W A Thornton, K A Weber, D Pfyffer, P Freund, C Tefertiller, A C Smith","doi":"10.46292/sci25-00015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To determine the interrater reliability between an automated and manual measure of lesion damage following spinal cord injury (SCI) using T2-weighted magnetic resonance images (MRI).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twenty-one MRIs were collected from patients who had completed rehabilitation at Craig Hospital. Manual measurements of midsagittal tissue bridges were conducted by an experienced rater using OsiriX (Pixmeo Sarl, Geneva, Switzerland), and automated measures were taken using the SCIsegV2 automated function through the Spinal Cord Toolbox (SCT). Manual and automated measurements were compared using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). Percentage agreement and Cohen's kappa statistic were calculated to compare detection of midsagittal tissue bridges.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>ICCs between the manual and automated measures were excellent (ICC 0.94, 95% CI 0.84-0.97, <i>P</i> < .001, for ventral tissue bridges; ICC 0.99, 95% CI 0.97-0.99, <i>P</i> < .001, for dorsal tissue bridges). Percentage agreement between raters was 90.8% for ventral, dorsal, and any midsagittal tissue bridge. Cohen's kappa for the detection of tissue bridges showed substantial agreement between the two raters for ventral, dorsal, and any tissue bridges (0.81, <i>P</i> < .001; 0.79, <i>P</i> < .001; and 0.81, <i>P</i> < .001, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Measurements of midsagittal tissue bridges between manual and automated raters are reliable. Automated measurements may help to expedite research related to midsagittal tissue bridges and functional outcomes for individuals with SCI.</p>","PeriodicalId":46769,"journal":{"name":"Topics in Spinal Cord Injury Rehabilitation","volume":"31 2","pages":"39-49"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12199566/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reliability of SCIseg Automated Measurement of Midsagittal Tissue Bridges in Spinal Cord Injuries Using an External Dataset.\",\"authors\":\"J R Connor, W A Thornton, K A Weber, D Pfyffer, P Freund, C Tefertiller, A C Smith\",\"doi\":\"10.46292/sci25-00015\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To determine the interrater reliability between an automated and manual measure of lesion damage following spinal cord injury (SCI) using T2-weighted magnetic resonance images (MRI).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twenty-one MRIs were collected from patients who had completed rehabilitation at Craig Hospital. Manual measurements of midsagittal tissue bridges were conducted by an experienced rater using OsiriX (Pixmeo Sarl, Geneva, Switzerland), and automated measures were taken using the SCIsegV2 automated function through the Spinal Cord Toolbox (SCT). Manual and automated measurements were compared using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). Percentage agreement and Cohen's kappa statistic were calculated to compare detection of midsagittal tissue bridges.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>ICCs between the manual and automated measures were excellent (ICC 0.94, 95% CI 0.84-0.97, <i>P</i> < .001, for ventral tissue bridges; ICC 0.99, 95% CI 0.97-0.99, <i>P</i> < .001, for dorsal tissue bridges). Percentage agreement between raters was 90.8% for ventral, dorsal, and any midsagittal tissue bridge. Cohen's kappa for the detection of tissue bridges showed substantial agreement between the two raters for ventral, dorsal, and any tissue bridges (0.81, <i>P</i> < .001; 0.79, <i>P</i> < .001; and 0.81, <i>P</i> < .001, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Measurements of midsagittal tissue bridges between manual and automated raters are reliable. Automated measurements may help to expedite research related to midsagittal tissue bridges and functional outcomes for individuals with SCI.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46769,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Topics in Spinal Cord Injury Rehabilitation\",\"volume\":\"31 2\",\"pages\":\"39-49\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12199566/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Topics in Spinal Cord Injury Rehabilitation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.46292/sci25-00015\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/6/19 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Topics in Spinal Cord Injury Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.46292/sci25-00015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/6/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:确定使用t2加权磁共振图像(MRI)自动和手动测量脊髓损伤(SCI)后病变损伤之间的相互可靠性。方法:收集21例在克雷格医院完成康复的患者的核磁共振成像。手动测量正中矢状面组织桥由经验丰富的评分员使用OsiriX (Pixmeo Sarl, Geneva, Switzerland)进行,并通过脊髓工具箱(SCT)使用SCIsegV2自动功能进行自动测量。使用类内相关系数(ICC)比较手动测量和自动测量。计算一致性百分比和Cohen’s kappa统计量来比较中矢状面组织桥的检测。结果:对于腹侧组织桥,人工测量和自动测量的ICCs之间的差异非常好(ICC 0.94, 95% CI 0.84-0.97, P < 0.001);背侧组织桥的ICC为0.99,95% CI 0.97-0.99, P < 0.001)。对于腹侧、背侧和任何正中矢状面组织桥,评分者之间的一致性百分比为90.8%。Cohen’s kappa在腹侧、背侧和任何组织桥的检测中显示出两种评分者之间的基本一致(0.81,P < 0.001;0.79, p < 0.001;和0.81,P < 0.001)。结论:手动和自动定位仪测量正中矢状面组织桥是可靠的。自动化测量可能有助于加快与脊髓损伤患者中矢状面组织桥和功能结果相关的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reliability of SCIseg Automated Measurement of Midsagittal Tissue Bridges in Spinal Cord Injuries Using an External Dataset.

Objectives: To determine the interrater reliability between an automated and manual measure of lesion damage following spinal cord injury (SCI) using T2-weighted magnetic resonance images (MRI).

Methods: Twenty-one MRIs were collected from patients who had completed rehabilitation at Craig Hospital. Manual measurements of midsagittal tissue bridges were conducted by an experienced rater using OsiriX (Pixmeo Sarl, Geneva, Switzerland), and automated measures were taken using the SCIsegV2 automated function through the Spinal Cord Toolbox (SCT). Manual and automated measurements were compared using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). Percentage agreement and Cohen's kappa statistic were calculated to compare detection of midsagittal tissue bridges.

Results: ICCs between the manual and automated measures were excellent (ICC 0.94, 95% CI 0.84-0.97, P < .001, for ventral tissue bridges; ICC 0.99, 95% CI 0.97-0.99, P < .001, for dorsal tissue bridges). Percentage agreement between raters was 90.8% for ventral, dorsal, and any midsagittal tissue bridge. Cohen's kappa for the detection of tissue bridges showed substantial agreement between the two raters for ventral, dorsal, and any tissue bridges (0.81, P < .001; 0.79, P < .001; and 0.81, P < .001, respectively).

Conclusion: Measurements of midsagittal tissue bridges between manual and automated raters are reliable. Automated measurements may help to expedite research related to midsagittal tissue bridges and functional outcomes for individuals with SCI.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
3.40%
发文量
33
期刊介绍: Now in our 22nd year as the leading interdisciplinary journal of SCI rehabilitation techniques and care. TSCIR is peer-reviewed, practical, and features one key topic per issue. Published topics include: mobility, sexuality, genitourinary, functional assessment, skin care, psychosocial, high tetraplegia, physical activity, pediatric, FES, sci/tbi, electronic medicine, orthotics, secondary conditions, research, aging, legal issues, women & sci, pain, environmental effects, life care planning
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信