Home › Research › Brain scans and imaging
NODDI: practical in vivo neurite orientation dispersion and density imaging of the human brain
Zhang H, Schneider T, Wheeler-Kingshott CA, Alexander DC.. NeuroImage, 2012-03-30
Topic: Plasma and spinal-fluid biomarkers
This paper introduces neurite orientation dispersion and density imaging (NODDI), a practical diffusion MRI technique for estimating the microstructural complexity of dendrites and axons in vivo on clinical MRI scanners. Such indices of neurites relate more directly to and provide more specific markers of brain tissue microstructure than standard indices from diffusion tensor imaging, such as fractional anisotropy (FA). Mapping these indices over the whole brain on clinical scanners presents new opportunities for understanding brain development and disorders. The proposed technique enables such mapping by combining a three-compartment tissue model with a two-shell high-angular-resolution diffusion imaging (HARDI) protocol optimized for clinical feasibility. An index of orientation dispersion is defined to characterize angular variation of neurites. We evaluate the method both in simulation and on a live human brain using a clinical 3T scanner. Results demonstrate that NODDI provides sensible neurite density and orientation dispersion estimates, thereby disentangling two key contributing factors to FA and enabling the analysis of each factor individually. We additionally show that while orientation dispersion can be estimated with just a single HARDI shell, neurite density requires at least two shells and can be estimated more accurately with the optimized two-shell protocol than with alternative two-shell protocols. The optimized protocol takes about 30 min to acquire, making it feasible for inclusion in a typical clinical setting. We further show that sampling fewer orientations in each shell can reduce the acquisition time to just 10 min with minimal impact on the accuracy of the estimates. This demonstrates the feasibility of NODDI even for the most time-sensitive clinical applications, such as neonatal and dementia imaging.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Zhang, H., Schneider, T., Wheeler-Kingshott, C. A., & Alexander, D. C. (2012). NODDI: practical in vivo neurite orientation dispersion and density imaging of the human brain. NeuroImage. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.03.072
Vancouver
Zhang H, Schneider T, Wheeler-Kingshott CA, Alexander DC. NODDI: practical in vivo neurite orientation dispersion and density imaging of the human brain. NeuroImage. 2012. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.03.072. PMID: 22484410.
BibTeX
@article{zhang2012-22484410,
author = {Zhang, H. and Schneider, T. and Wheeler-Kingshott, C. A. and Alexander, D. C.},
title = {{NODDI: practical in vivo neurite orientation dispersion and density imaging of the human brain}},
journal = {NeuroImage},
year = {2012},
doi = {10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.03.072},
pmid = {22484410},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.03.072}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Results demonstrate that NODDI provides sensible neurite density and orientation dispersion estimates, thereby disentangling two key contributing factors to FA and enabling the analysis of each factor individually.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Brain scans & tests →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 36/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 36 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (NeuroImage) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2012 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 22484410) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 21 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 36 out of 100. |
| Total | 36 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related studies in Brain scans and imaging
Also tagged “diffusion”
171 studies in the library carry the topic tag “diffusion”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 171 tagged studies.