Inter-subject receive-template substitution for quantitative brain water content mapping at 3 T: a leave-one-out evaluation
- 1Institute of Neuroscience and Medicine 4, Medical Imaging Physics, Forschungszentrum Jülich
- 2Department of Neurology, RWTH Aachen University
- 3JARA–BRAIN – Translational Medicine
Abstract
Introduction: To evaluate a configuration-specific inter-subject receive template as an alternative to participant-specific receive referencing within the evaluated 3 T scanner configuration.
Methods: Datasets from twenty-five healthy subjects were analyzed using a strict leave-one-participant-out method. Each degree-3 template used the other 24 participants. Arm E used a participant-specific effective relative receive divisor; Arm T used the held-out template. Both arms underwent independent, identically defined residual calibration, including a local intercept (C ₀ ), its spatially regularized field (μ), and the mean-normalized form used downstream (μ). This was followed by ventricular-CSF calibration. Primary outcomes were participant-level median quantitative water content (qWC) in white and gray matter; whole brain was secondary. Paired bias, mean absolute error (MAE), Bland–Altman limits, Pearson r, and Lin concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) were calculated.
Results: Mean relative receive-template mismatch was 2.273% (standard deviation (SD), 0.568%; range, 1.431%–3.615%). Mean Arm T minus Arm E differences were −0.04 percentage units (p.u.; dimensionless water fraction relative to pure water = 100 p.u.) in white matter and −0.17 p.u. in gray matter; MAE was 0.17 and 0.22 p.u., and CCC was 0.991 and 0.989, respectively. Whole-brain bias was −0.12 p.u. (MAE, 0.19 p.u.; CCC, 0.993). Bland–Altman widths were below 1 p.u. Exploratory associations between global mismatch and qWC disagreement were weak; all 95% participant-bootstrap confidence intervals spanned zero.
Discussion: Under symmetric arm-specific calibration, the configuration-specific template produced qWC estimates in close agreement with the participant-specific explicit reference strategy. This internal matched-configuration result supports technical feasibility but does not establish formal equivalence, interchangeability, or external generalization.
Related
- [18F]FDG brain PET-MR versus PET/CT in a clinical cohort: intra-subject quantitative comparisons
- Quantitative Assessment of Postoperative Lumbar Morphology Using Geometric Morphometrics: Within-Subject Changes Following TLIF and Decompression.
- Exploratory evaluation of a CEUS-derived substitution for solid-component measurement in the ADNEX model.
- Quantitative determination of lead in household paints in the gambia and evaluation of potential childhood risks
- The initial application of RawVisionTM plaque (RVP) quantitative technique in evaluation for carotid plaque vulnerability
BibTeX
@article{abbas2026intersubject,
title = {{Inter-subject receive-template substitution for quantitative brain water content mapping at 3 T: a leave-one-out evaluation}},
author = {Zaheer Abbas and Faizan Ullah and Sergo Gegechkori and Wieland A. Worthoff and N. Jon Shah},
journal = {Frontiers in Neuroscience},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.3389/fnins.2026.1986813},
url = {https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnins.2026.1986813/full},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Inter-subject receive-template substitution for quantitative brain water content mapping at 3 T: a leave-one-out evaluation
AU - Zaheer Abbas
AU - Faizan Ullah
AU - Sergo Gegechkori
AU - Wieland A. Worthoff
AU - N. Jon Shah
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/19
JO - Frontiers in Neuroscience
DO - 10.3389/fnins.2026.1986813
UR - https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnins.2026.1986813/full
AB - Introduction: To evaluate a configuration-specific inter-subject receive template as an alternative to participant-specific receive referencing within the evaluated 3 T scanner configuration. Methods: Datasets from twenty-five healthy subjects were analyzed using a strict leave-one-participant-out method. Each degree-3 template used the other 24 participants. Arm E used a participant-specific effective relative receive divisor; Arm T used the held-out template. Both arms underwent independent, identically defined residual calibration, including a local intercept (C ₀ ), its spatially regularized field (μ), and the mean-normalized form used downstream (μ). This was followed by ventricular-CSF calibration. Primary outcomes were participant-level median quantitative water content (qWC) in white and gray matter; whole brain was secondary. Paired bias, mean absolute error (MAE), Bland–Altman limits, Pearson r, and Lin concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) were calculated. Results: Mean relative receive-template mismatch was 2.273% (standard deviation (SD), 0.568%; range, 1.431%–3.615%). Mean Arm T minus Arm E differences were −0.04 percentage units (p.u.; dimensionless water fraction relative to pure water = 100 p.u.) in white matter and −0.17 p.u. in gray matter; MAE was 0.17 and 0.22 p.u., and CCC was 0.991 and 0.989, respectively. Whole-brain bias was −0.12 p.u. (MAE, 0.19 p.u.; CCC, 0.993). Bland–Altman widths were below 1 p.u. Exploratory associations between global mismatch and qWC disagreement were weak; all 95% participant-bootstrap confidence intervals spanned zero. Discussion: Under symmetric arm-specific calibration, the configuration-specific template produced qWC estimates in close agreement with the participant-specific explicit reference strategy. This internal matched-configuration result supports technical feasibility but does not establish formal equivalence, interchangeability, or external generalization.
SN - 1662-453X
SN - 1662-4548
ER -