Diana Maria Sima

Dr. Diana Maria Sima

icometrix
+1
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

22Years (2005-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 March 2017 in NeuroImage
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
ACAaron Carass
Aaron Carass
SRSnehashis Roy
Snehashis Roy
AJAmod Jog
Amod Jog
JCJennifer L. Cuzzocreo
Jennifer L. Cuzzocreo
EMElizabeth Magrath
Elizabeth Magrath
DPDzung L. Pham
Dzung L. Pham
In conjunction with the ISBI 2015 conference, we organized a longitudinal lesion segmentation challenge providing training and test data to registered participants. The training data consisted of five subjects with a mean of 4.4 time-points, and test data of fourteen subjects with a mean of 4.4 time-points. All 82 data sets had the white matter lesions associated with multiple sclerosis delineated by two human expert raters. Eleven teams submitted results using state-of-the-art lesion segmentation algorithms to the challenge, with ten teams presenting their results at the conference. We present a quantitative evaluation comparing the consistency of the two raters as well as exploring the performance of the eleven submitted results in addition to three other lesion segmentation algorithms. The challenge presented three unique opportunities: (1) the sharing of a rich data set; (2) collaboration and comparison of the various avenues of research being pursued in the community; and (3) a review and refinement of the evaluation metrics currently in use. We report on the performance of the challenge participants, as well as the construction and evaluation of a consensus delineation. The image data and manual delineations will continue to be available for download, through an evaluation website2 as a resource for future researchers in the area. This data resource provides a platform to compare existing methods in a fair and consistent manner to each other and multiple manual raters.

1 January 2015 in NeuroImage: Clinical
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
SJSaurabh Jain
Saurabh Jain
DSDiana Maria Sima
Diana Maria Sima
ARAnnemie Ribbens
Annemie Ribbens
MCMelissa Cambron
Melissa Cambron
AMAnke Maertens
Anke Maertens
DSDirk Smeets
Dirk Smeets
The location and extent of white matter lesions on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are important criteria for diagnosis, follow-up and prognosis of multiple sclerosis (MS). Clinical trials have shown that quantitative values, such as lesion volumes, are meaningful in MS prognosis. Manual lesion delineation for the segmentation of lesions is, however, time-consuming and suffers from observer variability. In this paper, we propose MSmetrix, an accurate and reliable automatic method for lesion segmentation based on MRI, independent of scanner or acquisition protocol and without requiring any training data. In MSmetrix, 3D T1-weighted and FLAIR MR images are used in a probabilistic model to detect white matter (WM) lesions as an outlier to normal brain while segmenting the brain tissue into grey matter, WM and cerebrospinal fluid. The actual lesion segmentation is performed based on prior knowledge about the location (within WM) and the appearance (hyperintense on FLAIR) of lesions. The accuracy of MSmetrix is evaluated by comparing its output with expert reference segmentations of 20 MRI datasets of MS patients. Spatial overlap (Dice) between the MSmetrix and the expert lesion segmentation is 0.67 ± 0.11. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) equals 0.8 indicating a good volumetric agreement between the MSmetrix and expert labelling. The reproducibility of MSmetrix' lesion volumes is evaluated based on 10 MS patients, scanned twice with a short interval on three different scanners. The agreement between the first and the second scan on each scanner is evaluated through the spatial overlap and absolute lesion volume difference between them. The spatial overlap was 0.69 ± 0.14 and absolute total lesion volume difference between the two scans was 0.54 ± 0.58 ml. Finally, the accuracy and reproducibility of MSmetrix compare favourably with other publicly available MS lesion segmentation algorithms, applied on the same data using default parameter settings.

14 December 2006 in NMR in Biomedicine
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
JPJean‐Baptiste Poullet
Jean‐Baptiste Poullet
DSDiana Maria Sima
Diana Maria Sima
ASArjan W. Simonetti
Arjan W. Simonetti
BNBart De Neuter
Bart De Neuter
LVLeentje Vanhamme
Leentje Vanhamme
SHSabine Van Huffel
Sabine Van Huffel

1 December 2008 in Journal of Magnetic Resonance
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
JPJean-Baptiste Poullet
Jean-Baptiste Poullet
DSDiana Maria Sima
Diana Maria Sima
SHSabine Van Huffel
Sabine Van Huffel

19 July 2016 in Brain and Behavior
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
DSDirk Smeets
Dirk Smeets
ARAnnemie Ribbens
Annemie Ribbens
DSDiana Maria Sima
Diana Maria Sima
MCMelissa Cambron
Melissa Cambron
DHDana Horakova
Dana Horakova
WHWim Van Hecke
Wim Van Hecke
Introduction: As neurodegeneration is recognized as a major contributor to disability in multiple sclerosis (MS), brain atrophy quantification could have a high added value in clinical practice to assess treatment efficacy and disease progression, provided that it has a sufficiently low measurement error to draw meaningful conclusions for an individual patient.Method: In this paper, we present an automated longitudinal method based on Jacobian integration for measuring whole‐brain and gray matter atrophy based on anatomical magnetic resonance images (MRI), named MSmetrix. MSmetrix is specifically designed to measure atrophy in patients with MS, by including iterative lesion segmentation and lesion filling based on FLAIR and T1‐weighted MRI scans.Results: MSmetrix is compared with SIENA with respect to test–retest error and consistency, resulting in an average test–retest error on an MS data set of 0.13% (MSmetrix) and 0.17% (SIENA) and a consistency error of 0.07% (MSmetrix) and 0.05% (SIENA). On a healthy subject data set including physiological variability the test–retest is 0.19% (MSmetrix) and 0.31% (SIENA).Conclusion: Therefore, we can conclude that MSmetrix could be of added value in clinical practice for the follow‐up of treatment and disease progression in MS patients.

22 May 2019 in Journal of Neurotrauma
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
SJSaurabh Jain
Saurabh Jain
TVThijs Vande Vyvere
Thijs Vande Vyvere
VTVasilis Terzopoulos
Vasilis Terzopoulos
DSDiana Maria Sima
Diana Maria Sima
EREloy Roura
Eloy Roura
JVJan Verheyden
Jan Verheyden
Traumatic brain injury is a complex and diverse medical condition with a high frequency of intracranial abnormalities. These can typically be visualized on a computed tomography (CT) scan, which provides important information for further patient management, such as the need for operative intervention. In order to quantify the extent of acute intracranial lesions and associated secondary injuries, such as midline shift and cisternal compression, visual assessment of CT images has limitations, including observer variability and lack of quantitative interpretation. Automated image analysis can quantify the extent of intracranial abnormalities and provide added value in routine clinical practice. In this article, we present icobrain, a fully automated method that reliably computes acute intracranial lesions volume based on deep learning, cistern volume, and midline shift on the noncontrast CT image of a patient. The accuracy of our method is evaluated on a subset of the multi-center data set from the CENTER-TBI (Collaborative European Neurotrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury) study for which expert annotations were used as a reference. Median volume differences between expert assessments and icobrain are 0.07 mL for acute intracranial lesions and −0.01 mL for cistern segmentation. Correlation between expert assessments and icobrain is 0.91 for volume of acute intracranial lesions and 0.94 for volume of the cisterns. For midline shift computations, median error is −0.22 mm, with a correlation of 0.93 with expert assessments.