S1 Table, S1 and S2 Figs appear incorrectly. The corrected files can be viewed below.
Supporting information
This table supports Table 2 in the primary text and shows the results for Gaussian and mean low pass filters rather than Butterworth filters. As indicated in the first column, images were resampled to 1 mm/pixel and were filtered with a mean or Gaussian filter. The masks used to apply the filters to the image pixels were either 3x3 pixels or 5x5 pixels as indicated. The Gaussian filter widths were either 1 or 3 pixels as indicated by the sigma values. GL indicates gray level; NGTDM, neighborhood gray-tone difference matrix; BW, Butterworth; OCCC, overall concordance correlation coefficient.
(PDF)
The features were extracted from images that had (a) no resampling with a Butterworth filter (order 2, frequency cutoff 100), (b) resampling to 1 mm/pixel and filtering with a Butterworth filter (order 2, frequency cutoff 200), (c) resampling to 1 mm/pixel and filtering with a Butterworth filter (order 2, frequency cutoff 125), (d) resampling to 1 mm/pixel and filtering with a Butterworth filter (order 2, frequency cutoff 100), and (e) resampling to 1 mm/pixel and filtering with a Butterworth filter (order 2, frequency cutoff 75). Boxes indicate incorrect (red) and correct (blue) groupings of the 5 FOV scans for each patient.
(PDF)
The features were extracted from images that had (a) no preprocessing, (b) resampling to 1 mm/pixel, (c) resampling to 1 mm/pixel and filtering with a 3x3 pixel mean filter, (d) resampling to 1 mm/pixel and filtering with a 3x3 pixel, 1 mm width Gaussian filter, and (e) resampling to 1 mm/pixel and filtering with a 5x5 pixel, 3 mm width Gaussian filter. Boxes indicate incorrect (red) and correct (blue) groupings of the 5 FOV scans for each patient.
(PDF)
Reference
- 1.Mackin D, Fave X, Zhang L, Yang J, Jones AK, Ng CS, et al. (2017) Harmonizing the pixel size in retrospective computed tomography radiomics studies. PLoS ONE 12(9): e0178524 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0178524 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Supplementary Materials
This table supports Table 2 in the primary text and shows the results for Gaussian and mean low pass filters rather than Butterworth filters. As indicated in the first column, images were resampled to 1 mm/pixel and were filtered with a mean or Gaussian filter. The masks used to apply the filters to the image pixels were either 3x3 pixels or 5x5 pixels as indicated. The Gaussian filter widths were either 1 or 3 pixels as indicated by the sigma values. GL indicates gray level; NGTDM, neighborhood gray-tone difference matrix; BW, Butterworth; OCCC, overall concordance correlation coefficient.
(PDF)
The features were extracted from images that had (a) no resampling with a Butterworth filter (order 2, frequency cutoff 100), (b) resampling to 1 mm/pixel and filtering with a Butterworth filter (order 2, frequency cutoff 200), (c) resampling to 1 mm/pixel and filtering with a Butterworth filter (order 2, frequency cutoff 125), (d) resampling to 1 mm/pixel and filtering with a Butterworth filter (order 2, frequency cutoff 100), and (e) resampling to 1 mm/pixel and filtering with a Butterworth filter (order 2, frequency cutoff 75). Boxes indicate incorrect (red) and correct (blue) groupings of the 5 FOV scans for each patient.
(PDF)
The features were extracted from images that had (a) no preprocessing, (b) resampling to 1 mm/pixel, (c) resampling to 1 mm/pixel and filtering with a 3x3 pixel mean filter, (d) resampling to 1 mm/pixel and filtering with a 3x3 pixel, 1 mm width Gaussian filter, and (e) resampling to 1 mm/pixel and filtering with a 5x5 pixel, 3 mm width Gaussian filter. Boxes indicate incorrect (red) and correct (blue) groupings of the 5 FOV scans for each patient.
(PDF)