Related Experiment Videos

Reliability and validity of ratings of signal hyperintensities on MRI by visual inspection and computerised

P Sachdev1, S Cathcart, R Shnier

  • 1School of Psychiatry, University of New South Wales, Kensington, Sydney, Australia. p.sachdev@unsw.edu.au

Psychiatry Research
|February 16, 2000
PubMed

Insights

Visual ratings of brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) signal hyperintensities (SHs) are adequate for clinical and research use. Computerized methods show modest reliability, and visual ratings correlate well with neuropsychological tests.

Area of Science:

  • Neuroimaging
  • Neuroradiology
  • Geriatric Psychiatry

Background:

  • Brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is crucial for assessing age-related changes and neurological disorders.
  • Signal hyperintensities (SHs) in white and gray matter are common findings in elderly individuals, particularly those with schizophrenia.
  • Standardized rating methods are essential for reliable interpretation of SHs.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare the reliability and validity of visual rating scales (Fazekas, Victoroff) versus a computerized method for quantifying brain MRI signal hyperintensities (SHs).
  • To assess the correlation between SH ratings and neuropsychological assessment outcomes in elderly subjects.

Main Methods:

  • 98 elderly subjects (62 schizophrenia, 36 controls) underwent brain MRI (T2-weighted images).
  • Signal hyperintensities (SHs) were rated using visual methods (Fazekas, Victoroff) and a computerized manual delineation method.
  • Inter-rater reliability and correlation between methods were assessed.
  • Neuropsychological assessments were performed on all subjects.

Main Results:

  • High inter-rater reliability was found for both visual rating methods.
  • The computerized method showed modest but significant inter-rater reliability.
  • Visual and computerized methods demonstrated good agreement, except for subcortical SHs.
  • Both visual and computerized methods showed modest correlations with some neuropsychological test measures.

Conclusions:

  • No clear superiority in reliability or validity was demonstrated for the computerized method over visual ratings.
  • Visual rating methods for SHs are adequate for most clinical and research applications.
  • Adequate training and standardized reference images are recommended for visual SH ratings.

Related Concept Videos