It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
In large population studies such as the UK Biobank (UKBB), quality control of the acquired images by visual assessment is unfeasible. In this paper, we apply a recently developed fully-automated quality control pipeline for cardiac MR (CMR) images to the first 19,265 short-axis (SA) cine stacks from the UKBB. We present the results for the three estimated quality metrics (heart coverage, inter-slice motion and image contrast in the cardiac region) as well as their potential associations with factors including acquisition details and subject-related phenotypes. Up to 14.2% of the analysed SA stacks had sub-optimal coverage (i.e. missing basal and/or apical slices), however most of them were limited to the first year of acquisition. Up to 16% of the stacks were affected by noticeable inter-slice motion (i.e. average inter-slice misalignment greater than 3.4 mm). Inter-slice motion was positively correlated with weight and body surface area. Only 2.1% of the stacks had an average end-diastolic cardiac image contrast below 30% of the dynamic range. These findings will be highly valuable for both the scientists involved in UKBB CMR acquisition and for the ones who use the dataset for research purposes.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details






1 Imperial College London, Department of Computing, BioMedIA Group, London, UK (GRID:grid.7445.2) (ISNI:0000 0001 2113 8111); City, University of London, Department of Computer Science, CitAI Research Centre, London, UK (GRID:grid.83440.3b) (ISNI:0000000121901201)
2 Imperial College London, Department of Computing, BioMedIA Group, London, UK (GRID:grid.7445.2) (ISNI:0000 0001 2113 8111)
3 Imperial College London, Department of Brain Sciences, London, UK (GRID:grid.7445.2) (ISNI:0000 0001 2113 8111)
4 Imperial College London, Department of Brain Sciences, London, UK (GRID:grid.7445.2) (ISNI:0000 0001 2113 8111); UK Dementia Research Institute, London, UK (GRID:grid.7445.2)