BIBSNet: A Deep Learning Baby Image Brain Segmentation Network for MRI Scans
Hendrickson, T. J.; Reiners, P.; Moore, L. A.; Perrone, A. J.; Alexopoulos, D.; Lee, E. G.; Styner, M.; Kardan, O.; Chamberlain, T. A.; Mummaneni, A.; Caldas, H. A.; Bower, B.; Stoyell, S.; Martin, T.; Sung, S.; Fair, E.; Uriarte-Lopez, J.; Rueter, A. R.; Yacoub, E.; Rosenberg, M. D.; Smyser, C. D.; Elison, J. T.; Graham, A.; Fair, D. A.; Feczko, E.
Show abstract
ObjectivesBrain segmentation of infant magnetic resonance (MR) images is vitally important for studying typical and atypical brain development. The infant brain undergoes many changes throughout the first years of postnatal life, making tissue segmentation difficult for most existing algorithms. Here we introduce a deep neural network BIBSNet (Baby and Infant Brain Segmentation Neural Network), an open-source, community-driven model for robust and generalizable brain segmentation leveraging data augmentation and a large sample size of manually annotated images. Experimental DesignIncluded in model training and testing were MR brain images from 90 participants with an age range of 0-8 months (median age 4.6 months). Using the BOBs repository of manually annotated real images along with synthetic segmentation images produced using SynthSeg, the model was trained using a 10-fold procedure. Model performance of segmentations was assessed by comparing BIBSNet, joint label fusion (JLF) inferred segmentation to ground truth segmentations using Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC). Additionally, MR data along with the FreeSurfer compatible segmentations were processed with the DCAN labs infant-ABCD-BIDS processing pipeline from ground truth, JLF, and BIBSNet to further assess model performance on derivative data, including cortical thickness, resting state connectivity and brain region volumes. Principal ObservationsBIBSNet segmentations outperforms JLF across all regions based on DSC comparisons. Additionally, with processed derived metrics, BIBSNet segmentations outperforms JLF segmentations across nearly all metrics. ConclusionsBIBSNet segmentation shows marked improvement over JLF across all age groups analyzed. The BIBSNet model is 600x faster compared to JLF, produces FreeSurfer-compatible segmentation labels, and can be easily included in other processing pipelines. BIBSNet provides a viable alternative for segmenting the brain in the earliest stages of development.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Automated joint skull-stripping and segmentation with Multi-Task U-Net in large mouse brain MRI databases 97%
- Connectomes for 40,000 UK Biobank participants: A multi-modal, multi-scale brain network resource 96%
- Atlas-independent brain connectome analysis at voxel-level granularity: graph convolutional networks for etiology classification in newborns 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Lesion aware automated processing pipeline for multimodal neuroimaging stroke data and The Virtual Brain (TVB) 97%
- OpenMAP-T1: A Rapid Deep Learning Approach to Parcellate 280 Anatomical Regions to Cover the Whole Brain 96%
- Assessing methods for geometric distortion compensation in 7T gradient echo fMRI data 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- A large, curated, open-source stroke neuroimaging dataset to improve lesion segmentation algorithms 97%
- CerebrA: Accurate registration and manual label correction of Mindboggle-101 atlas for MNI-ICBM152 template 96%
- Magnetic resonance imaging datasets with anatomical fiducials for quality control and registration 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Longitudinal deformation based morphometry pipeline to study neuroanatomical differences in structural MRI based on SyN unbiased templates 97%
- Visual QC Protocol for FreeSurfer Cortical Parcellations from Anatomical MRI 95%
- Sources of information waste in neuroimaging:mishandling structures, thinking dichotomously, and over-reducing data 94%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.