Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 1, 2025

Quantitative Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Skeletal Muscle Disease
Published on: December 18, 2016
Scan/rescan reliability of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)
Menekse Salar Barim1, M Fehmi Capanoglu2,3, Richard F Sesek2
1Division of Field Studies and Engineering (DFSE), Engineering and Physical Hazards Branch (EPHB), Human Factors and Ergonomics Team (HFET), National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), 1090 Tusculum Avenue, Cincinnati, OH, 45226, USA. oih9@cdc.gov.
Background:
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is increasingly used to estimate the geometric dimensions of lower lumbar vertebrae. While MRI-based measurements have demonstrated good reliability with interclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) of 0.80 or higher, many evaluations focus solely on the comparison of identical MRI images. This approach primarily reflects analyst dexterity and does not assess the reliability of the entire process, including imaging and image selection.
Objective:
To evaluate the inter- and intra-rater reliability of the entire process of using MRI to measure biomechanically relevant lumbar spinal characteristics, incorporating imaging, image selection, and analysis.
Methods:
A dataset of 144 low-back MRI scans was analyzed. Reliability assessments were performed under different conditions: (1) identical scans rated by the same analyst at different times (intra-rater reliability) and (2) distinct scans of the same subject obtained by different MRI operators and analyzed by different analysts (inter-rater reliability). Mean absolute differences in measurements were calculated, and sources of variability, such as breathing artifacts, were noted.
Results:
Larger discrepancies were observed when comparing distinct scans analyzed by different MRI operators and analysts. In the "worst-case" scenario, where both the MRI operator and analyst differed, a 4.05% mean absolute difference was noted for anterior endplate measurements. This was higher than the 2.76% difference observed when analysts re-rated their own scans after one month. Despite these discrepancies, the variability in measurements was relatively low and primarily attributed to factors like breathing artifacts.
Conclusion:
The process of using MRI to derive biomechanical measures, particularly for bony structures, demonstrates robust reliability. Variability in measurements is minimal even under challenging conditions, supporting the use of MRI for biomechanical assessments.
Related Concept Videos
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Imaging Studies I: CT and MRI
Description of the Procedures
Computed Tomography (CT) scan:
Computed Tomography (CT) scans use X-ray technology to generate detailed images of bones, organs, and tissues. During the scan, the patient lies on a moving table...
NMR Spectrometers: Resolution and Error Correction
Radiological Investigation II: MRI and Ventilation Perfusion Scan
Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and Ventilation Perfusion Scans are two radiological investigations that offer detailed diagnostic images of the body, particularly lung structures.
MRI
MRI uses magnetic fields and radiofrequency signals to distinguish between normal and abnormal tissues. This technology provides a more detailed diagnostic image than CT scans, enabling it to characterize pulmonary nodules, stage bronchogenic carcinoma, and evaluate inflammatory activity in...

