Article Figures & Data
Figures
- Fig 1.
Total number of microbleeds for mIP processing with and without an overlap. The left figure shows results of mIP processing without overlap but with differences in section thickness. The right figure shows the results of processing with overlap. The total number of detected microbleeds (possible and definite) is shown for all subjects, expressed as a percentage of maximum detected microbleeds within subjects.
- Fig 2.
Examples of microbleeds that are easy or hard to detect. This figure illustrates different microbleeds that were classified as definite microbleeds in the ground truth ratings. A and B, The TE 1 and TE 2 of the T2*-weighted 7T MR scan with a microbleed that was detected by all raters. The microbleed is seen on both the TE 1 and TE 2 images. C and D, A microbleed that was only detected by a few raters. This microbleed was only seen on the TE 2 image.
Tables
Visual rating of individual definite microbleed locations compared with the ground truth ratinga
2/0 mIP Processing 4/−2 mIP Processing Rater 1 Rater 2 Rater 3 Rater 4 Mean of All Raters Rater 1 Rater 2 Rater 3 Rater 4 Mean of All Raters Mean time per subject (min) 42 18 24 35 30 42 16 23 34 29 Lobar (sensitivity/SI) 0.61/0.63 0.23/0.37 0.61/0.72 0.71/0.76 0.54/0.62 0.65/0.73 0.42/0.59 0.52/0.65 0.81/0.83 0.60/0.70 Deep (sensitivity/SI) 1.00/0.89 0.75/0.75 0.75/0.55 0.75/0.40 0.81/0.65 0.50/0.36 0.75/0.75 0.50/0.67 1.00/0.46 0.69/0.56 Total (sensitivity/SI) 0.67/0.68 0.31/0.46 0.64/0.70 0.72/0.69 0.58/0.63 0.61/0.66 0.44/0.60 0.53/0.67 0.83/0.77 0.60/0.67 ↵a Ratings for each rater, which consisted of individual definite microbleed locations on scans with 2/0 and 4/−2 mIP processing, were compared with the ground truth ratings by sensitivity and SI.
