Skip to main content
. 2014 Aug 23;6:86–92. doi: 10.1016/j.nicl.2014.08.016

Table 1.

Absolute mean difference in NWMV between original and filled images from the 1.5 T OASIS images. Results are presented for both SPM8 and FAST segmentation methods. Lesion volume is ranged by size intervals with n = 6 by interval. Values indicate the mean and standard deviation of the absolute difference in volume (μ ± σ) of each lesion-filling method at a current lesion interval.

Method/lesion(ml) 0.5–4 ml (n = 6) 4–11 ml (n = 6) 11–20 ml (n = 6) 25–36 ml (n = 6) >36 ml (n = 6)
SPM8 segmentation method
NONE 0.47 ± 0.50 1.54 ± 0.95 2.71 ± 0.60 7.09 ± 1.42 10.64 ± 3.10
MASKED 1.56 ± 0.94 2.42 ± 0.70 1.49 ± 0.43 3.16 ± 1.35 3.91 ± 1.76
MAGON 0.03 ± 0.03 0.08 ± 0.07 0.24 ± 0.25 0.32 ± 0.19 1.95 ± 1.25
FSL-L 0.03 ± 0.01 0.10 ± 0.05 0.31 ± 0.15 0.55 ± 0.07 2.38 ± 1.26
LEAP 0.04 ± 0.04 0.10 ± 0.05 0.19 ± 0.05 0.44 ± 0.22 0.92 ± 0.42
SLF 0.03 ± 0.03 0.04 ± 0.03 0.09 ± 0.06 0.23 ± 0.20 0.55 ± 0.23
FAST segmentation method
NONE 0.21 ± 0.21 0.71 ± 0.38 1.88 ± 0.56 4.55 ± 2.04 8.95 ± 4.36
MASKED 9.52 ± 1.20 8.36 ± 1.30 11.53 ± 4.91 7.42 ± 1.08 5.79 ± 1.92
MAGON 0.08 ± 0.04 0.25 ± 0.22 0.91 ± 0.63 1.28 ± 0.39 6.24 ± 2.74
FSL-L 0.03 ± 0.02 0.05 ± 0.05 0.30 ± 0.21 0.58 ± 0.19 2.13 ± 1.22
LEAP 0.08 ± 0.07 0.34 ± 0.10 0.65 ± 0.13 1.07 ± 0.66 2.50 ± 0.80
SLF 0.07 ± 0.05 0.13 ± 0.09 0.22 ± 0.15 0.36 ± 0.30 0.42 ± 0.16