Search

Your search keyword '"Visser, Peter-Jelle"' showing total 4 results
Start Over Author "Visser, Peter-Jelle"
4 results on '"Visser, Peter-Jelle"'

1. The EADC‐ADNI Harmonized Protocol for manual hippocampal segmentation on magnetic resonance: Evidence of validity

Author

Frisoni, Giovanni B, Jack, Clifford R, Bocchetta, Martina, Bauer, Corinna, Frederiksen, Kristian S, Liu, Yawu, Preboske, Gregory, Swihart, Tim, Blair, Melanie, Cavedo, Enrica, Grothe, Michel J, Lanfredi, Mariangela, Martinez, Oliver, Nishikawa, Masami, Portegies, Marileen, Stoub, Travis, Ward, Chadwich, Apostolova, Liana G, Ganzola, Rossana, Wolf, Dominik, Barkhof, Frederik, Bartzokis, George, DeCarli, Charles, Csernansky, John G, deToledo‐Morrell, Leyla, Geerlings, Mirjam I, Kaye, Jeffrey, Killiany, Ronald J, Lehéricy, Stephane, Matsuda, Hiroshi, O'Brien, John, Silbert, Lisa C, Scheltens, Philip, Soininen, Hilkka, Teipel, Stefan, Waldemar, Gunhild, Fellgiebel, Andreas, Barnes, Josephine, Firbank, Michael, Gerritsen, Lotte, Henneman, Wouter, Malykhin, Nikolai, Pruessner, Jens C, Wang, Lei, Watson, Craig, Wolf, Henrike, deLeon, Mony, Pantel, Johannes, Ferrari, Clarissa, Bosco, Paolo, Pasqualetti, Patrizio, Duchesne, Simon, Duvernoy, Henri, Boccardi, Marina, Initiative, EADC‐ADNI Working Group on The Harmonized Protocol for Manual Hippocampal Volumetry and for the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging, Albert, Marilyn S, Bennet, David, Camicioli, Richard, Collins, D Louis, Dubois, Bruno, Hampel, Harald, denHeijer, Tom, Hock, Christofer, Jagust, William, Launer, Leonore, Maller, Jerome J, Mueller, Susan, Sachdev, Perminder, Simmons, Andy, Thompson, Paul M, Visser, Peter‐Jelle, Wahlund, Lars‐Olof, Weiner, Michael W, and Winblad, Bengt

Subjects
Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Neurosciences, Clinical Sciences, Brain Disorders, Biomedical Imaging, Clinical Research, Aged, Alzheimer Disease, Atrophy, Female, Functional Laterality, Hippocampus, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Imaging, Three-Dimensional, Internet, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Neuroimaging, Organ Size, Reproducibility of Results, Hippocampal volumetry, Magnetic resonance, Alzheimer's disease, Biomarkers, Diagnostic criteria, Enrichment, Clinical trials, Validation, Harmonized protocol, Standard operating procedures, Manual segmentation, EADC-ADNI Working Group on The Harmonized Protocol for Manual Hippocampal Volumetry and for the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative, Geriatrics, Clinical sciences, Biological psychology
Abstract

BackgroundAn international Delphi panel has defined a harmonized protocol (HarP) for the manual segmentation of the hippocampus on MR. The aim of this study is to study the concurrent validity of the HarP toward local protocols, and its major sources of variance.MethodsFourteen tracers segmented 10 Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) cases scanned at 1.5 T and 3T following local protocols, qualified for segmentation based on the HarP through a standard web-platform and resegmented following the HarP. The five most accurate tracers followed the HarP to segment 15 ADNI cases acquired at three time points on both 1.5 T and 3T.ResultsThe agreement among tracers was relatively low with the local protocols (absolute left/right ICC 0.44/0.43) and much higher with the HarP (absolute left/right ICC 0.88/0.89). On the larger set of 15 cases, the HarP agreement within (left/right ICC range: 0.94/0.95 to 0.99/0.99) and among tracers (left/right ICC range: 0.89/0.90) was very high. The volume variance due to different tracers was 0.9% of the total, comparing favorably to variance due to scanner manufacturer (1.2), atrophy rates (3.5), hemispheric asymmetry (3.7), field strength (4.4), and significantly smaller than the variance due to atrophy (33.5%, P < .001), and physiological variability (49.2%, P < .001).ConclusionsThe HarP has high measurement stability compared with local segmentation protocols, and good reproducibility within and among human tracers. Hippocampi segmented with the HarP can be used as a reference for the qualification of human tracers and automated segmentation algorithms.

Published
2015

2. The EADC-ADNI Harmonized Protocol for manual hippocampal segmentation on magnetic resonance: Evidence of validity

Author

Albert, Marilyn S., Bennet, David, Camicioli, Richard, Collins, D. Louis, Dubois, Bruno, Hampel, Harald, denHeijer, Tom, Hock, Christofer, Jagust, William, Launer, Leonore, Maller, Jerome J., Mueller, Susan, Sachdev, Perminder, Simmons, Andy, Thompson, Paul M., Visser, Peter-Jelle, Wahlund, Lars-Olof, Weiner, Michael W., Winblad, Bengt, Frisoni, Giovanni B., Jack, Clifford R., Jr., Bocchetta, Martina, Bauer, Corinna, Frederiksen, Kristian S., Liu, Yawu, Preboske, Gregory, Swihart, Tim, Blair, Melanie, Cavedo, Enrica, Grothe, Michel J., Lanfredi, Mariangela, Martinez, Oliver, Nishikawa, Masami, Portegies, Marileen, Stoub, Travis, Ward, Chadwich, Apostolova, Liana G., Ganzola, Rossana, Wolf, Dominik, Barkhof, Frederik, Bartzokis, George, DeCarli, Charles, Csernansky, John G., deToledo-Morrell, Leyla, Geerlings, Mirjam I., Kaye, Jeffrey, Killiany, Ronald J., Lehéricy, Stephane, Matsuda, Hiroshi, O'Brien, John, Silbert, Lisa C., Scheltens, Philip, Soininen, Hilkka, Teipel, Stefan, Waldemar, Gunhild, Fellgiebel, Andreas, Barnes, Josephine, Firbank, Michael, Gerritsen, Lotte, Henneman, Wouter, Malykhin, Nikolai, Pruessner, Jens C., Wang, Lei, Watson, Craig, Wolf, Henrike, deLeon, Mony, Pantel, Johannes, Ferrari, Clarissa, Bosco, Paolo, Pasqualetti, Patrizio, Duchesne, Simon, Duvernoy, Henri, and Boccardi, Marina

Published
2015
Full Text
View/download PDF

3. A Cost-Consequence Analysis of Different Screening Procedures in Alzheimer’s Disease: Results from the MOPEAD Project

Author

Wimo, Anders, Belger, Mark, Sannemann, Lena, Stoekenbroek, Malou, Gurruchaga Telleria, Miren, Valero, Sergi, Vermunt, Lisa, Waterink, Lisa, Winblad, Bengt, Visser, Peter Jelle, Zwan, Marissa, Boada, Mercè, Bon, Jaka, Collaborators, consortium, members of the MOPEAD, Escher, Claus, Müller, Theresa, Bogdanovic, Nenad, Andersen, Pia, Spulber, Gabriela, Sundström, Maria, Westman, Eric, Ferreira, Daniel, Jessen, Frank, Jelic, Vesna, Haglund, Anders, Stomrud, Erik, Nelvig, Anders, Saha, Samir, Petek, Davorina, Serné, Erik, Dumas, Annette, Kramberger, Milica G, Jamilis, Laura, Johansson, Gunilla, Rodrigo Salas, Adrián, Rodríguez Gómez, Octavio, Clinical chemistry, Neurology, and Amsterdam Neuroscience - Neurodegeneration

Subjects
medicine.medical_specialty, Referral, statistics & numerical data [Internet], Cost consequences, diagnosis, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Population, costs, Primary care, Disease, cost analysis, Alzheimer Disease, Diabetes mellitus, medicine, Diabetes Mellitus, Dementia, Humans, Mass Screening, ddc:610, education, Screening procedures, education.field_of_study, Internet, Primary Health Care, business.industry, General Neuroscience, economics [Primary Health Care], screening, diagnosis [Alzheimer Disease], General Medicine, medicine.disease, Europe, Psychiatry and Mental health, Clinical Psychology, Family medicine, cost-consequence analysis, statistics & numerical data [Primary Health Care], diagnostic work-up, Geriatrics and Gerontology, Patient Participation, business, economics [Internet], Alzheimer’s disease, Research Article, dementia
Abstract

Background: For care planning and support, under-detection and late diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is a great challenge. Models of Patient-Engagement for Alzheimer’s Disease (MOPEAD) is an EU-funded project aiming at testing different strategies to improve this situation. Objective: To make a cost-consequence analysis of MOPEAD. Methods: Four screening strategies were tested in five countries (Germany, the Netherlands, Slovenia, Spain, and Sweden): 1) a web-approach; 2) Open-House initiative; 3) in primary care; and 4) by diabetes specialists. Persons-at-risk of AD in all strategies were offered referral to a hospital-based specialist. The primary health-economic outcome was the cost per true-positive case (TP) of AD from the screened population. Results: Of 2,847 screened persons, 1,121 screened positive (39%), 402 were evaluated at memory clinics (14%), and 236 got an AD diagnosis (8%). The cost per TP of those screened was €3,115 with the web-approach, €2,722 with the Open-House, €1,530 in primary care, and €1,190 by diabetes specialists. Sensitivity analyses that more likely reflect the real-world situation confirmed the results. The number-needed-to-screen was 30 with the web-approach, 8 with the Open-House and primary care, and 6 with the diabetes specialists. There were country differences in terms of screening rates, referrals to memory clinics, staff-types involved, and costs per TP. Conclusion: In primary care and by the diabetes specialist, the costs per TP/screened population were lowest, but the capacity of such settings to identify cases with AD-risk must be discussed. Hence new diagnostic strategies such as web-solutions and Open-House initiatives may be valuable after modifications.

Published
2021
Full Text
View/download PDF

4. The EADC-ADNI Harmonized Protocol for manual hippocampal segmentation on magnetic resonance : Evidence of validity

Author

Frisoni, Giovanni B., Jack, Clifford R., Grothe, Michel J., Lanfredi, Mariangela, Martinez, Oliver, Nishikawa, Masami, Portegies, Marileen, Stoub, Travis, Ward, Chadwich, Apostolova, Liana G., Ganzola, Rossana, Wolf, Dominik, Bocchetta, Martina, Barkhof, Frederik, Bartzokis, George, DeCarli, Charles, Csernansky, John G., deToledo-Morrell, Leyla, Geerlings, Mirjam I., Kaye, Jeffrey, Killiany, Ronald J., Lehéricy, Stephane, Matsuda, Hiroshi, Bauer, Corinna, O'Brien, John, Silbert, Lisa C., Scheltens, Philip, Soininen, Hilkka, Teipel, Stefan, Waldemar, Gunhild, Fellgiebel, Andreas, Barnes, Josephine, Firbank, Michael, Gerritsen, Lotte, Frederiksen, Kristian S., Henneman, Wouter, Malykhin, Nikolai, Pruessner, Jens C., Wang, Lei, Watson, Craig, Wolf, Henrike, deLeon, Mony, Pantel, Johannes, Ferrari, Clarissa, Bosco, Paolo, Liu, Yawu, Pasqualetti, Patrizio, Duchesne, Simon, Duvernoy, Henri, Boccardi, Marina, Albert, Marilyn S., Bennet, David, Camicioli, Richard, Collins, D. Louis, Dubois, Bruno, Hampel, Harald, Preboske, Gregory, denHeijer, Tom, Hock, Christofer, Jagust, William, Launer, Leonore, Maller, Jerome J., Mueller, Susan, Sachdev, Perminder, Simmons, Andy, Thompson, Paul M., Visser, Peter-Jelle, Swihart, Tim, Wahlund, Lars-Olof, Weiner, Michael W., Winblad, Bengt, Blair, Melanie, Cavedo, Enrica, Radiology and nuclear medicine, Neurology, Psychiatry, NCA - Brain imaging technology, and NCA - neurodegeneration

Subjects
Male, Pathology, Diagnostic criteria, Epidemiology, Image Processing, genetics [Alzheimer Disease], Hippocampus, Functional Laterality, Imaging, pathology [Alzheimer Disease], ddc:616.89, methods [Magnetic Resonance Imaging], Computer-Assisted, Clinical trials, ddc:150, methods [Image Processing, Computer-Assisted], Validation, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Segmentation, HARP, medicine.diagnostic_test, Health Policy, Organ Size, Alzheimer's disease, Middle Aged, instrumentation [Magnetic Resonance Imaging], Manual segmentation, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Psychiatry and Mental health, Magnetic resonance, Biomedical Imaging, Female, methods [Neuroimaging], methods [Imaging, Three-Dimensional], EADC-ADNI Working Group on The Harmonized Protocol for Manual Hippocampal Volumetry and for the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative, medicine.medical_specialty, Hippocampal volumetry, Biomarkers, Enrichment, Harmonized protocol, Standard operating procedures, Concurrent validity, Clinical Sciences, Neuroimaging, Article, Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience, Imaging, Three-Dimensional, Developmental Neuroscience, Clinical Research, Alzheimer Disease, medicine, Humans, ddc:610, Aged, Protocol (science), Reproducibility, Internet, business.industry, Neurosciences, Reproducibility of Results, Magnetic resonance imaging, Brain Disorders, pathology [Hippocampus], Geriatrics, Three-Dimensional, Neurology (clinical), Geriatrics and Gerontology, Atrophy, Nuclear medicine, business
Abstract

BackgroundAn international Delphi panel has defined a harmonized protocol (HarP) for the manual segmentation of the hippocampus on MR. The aim of this study is to study the concurrent validity of the HarP toward local protocols, and its major sources of variance.MethodsFourteen tracers segmented 10 Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) cases scanned at 1.5 T and 3T following local protocols, qualified for segmentation based on the HarP through a standard web-platform and resegmented following the HarP. The five most accurate tracers followed the HarP to segment 15 ADNI cases acquired at three time points on both 1.5 T and 3T.ResultsThe agreement among tracers was relatively low with the local protocols (absolute left/right ICC 0.44/0.43) and much higher with the HarP (absolute left/right ICC 0.88/0.89). On the larger set of 15 cases, the HarP agreement within (left/right ICC range: 0.94/0.95 to 0.99/0.99) and among tracers (left/right ICC range: 0.89/0.90) was very high. The volume variance due to different tracers was 0.9% of the total, comparing favorably to variance due to scanner manufacturer (1.2), atrophy rates (3.5), hemispheric asymmetry (3.7), field strength (4.4), and significantly smaller than the variance due to atrophy (33.5%, P < .001), and physiological variability (49.2%, P < .001).ConclusionsThe HarP has high measurement stability compared with local segmentation protocols, and good reproducibility within and among human tracers. Hippocampi segmented with the HarP can be used as a reference for the qualification of human tracers and automated segmentation algorithms. published

Published
2015
Full Text
View/download PDF

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results