Human Brain Mapping · 2005 · 116 citations · 20 references
MedicineNeuroscienceRadiologyDiagnostic ImagingDiagnostic RadiologyQuality AssuranceData QualityData Quality AssessmentFunctional NeuroimagingImage QualityImage Quality AssessmentMagnetic Resonance ImagingArtifacts In Magnetic Resonance ImagingData Quality StandardizationDiagnostic Image Quality CriteriaFunctional Magnetic Resonance ImagingFunctional MriMedical Image Quality AssessmentQuality AssessmentSignal Quality Assessment
Quality assessment of fMRI data is essential for large, multicenter studies to ensure comparable data quality and avoid misinterpretation. The study presents a standardized, fully automated QA procedure that classifies data quality and detects artifacts by inspecting temporal variations. The procedure was applied to phantom measurements to evaluate scanner and stimulation hardware performance and to in vivo data, efficiently detecting artifacts within the standard fMRI post‑processing pipeline via realignment. An example demonstrates the method, and criteria are defined to quantify data‑quality differences between two groups. Published in Human Brain Mapping 25:237–246, 2005; © 2005 Wiley‑Liss, Inc.
Abstract Standard procedures to achieve quality assessment (QA) of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data are of great importance. A standardized and fully automated procedure for QA is presented that allows for classification of data quality and the detection of artifacts by inspecting temporal variations. The application of the procedure on phantom measurements was used to check scanner and stimulation hardware performance. In vivo imaging data were checked efficiently for artifacts within the standard fMRI post‐processing procedure by realignment. Standardized and routinely carried out QA is essential for extensive data amounts as collected in fMRI, especially in multicenter studies. Furthermore, for the comparison of two different groups, it is important to ensure that data quality is approximately equal to avoid possible misinterpretations. This is shown by example, and criteria to quantify differences of data quality between two groups are defined. Hum Brain Mapp 25:237–246, 2005. © 2005 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.
20
Numerical recipes in C: the art of scientific computing
Choice Reviews Online · 1993 · 18.1K citations · Full text
Numerical recipes in Pascal: the art of scientific computing
Choice Reviews Online · 1990 · 11.9K citations
Numerical Recipes in C: The Art of Scientific Computing.
Chris Birchenhall, William H. Press, Saul A. Teukolsky et al. · The Economic Journal · 1994 · 4.4K citations