Brain InformaticsNeurosciencePeer-reviewed journal article
Quantifying Numerical and Spatial Reliability of Amygdala and Hippocampal Subdivisions in FreeSurfer
Isabella KahhaléiD, Nicholas J. BuseriD, Christopher R. MadaniD, Jamie Lars HansoniD
Abstract
On-going, large-scale neuroimaging initiatives can aid in uncovering neurobiological causes and correlates of poor mental health, disease pathology, and many other important conditions. As projects grow in scale with hundreds, even thousands, of individual participants and scans collected, quantification of brain structures by automated algorithms is becoming the only truly tractable approach. Here, we assessed the spatial and numerical reliability for newly deployed automated segmentation of hippocampal subfields and amygdala nuclei in FreeSurfer 7. In a sample of participants with repeated structural imaging scans (N=923), we found numerical reliability (as assessed by intraclass correlations, ICCs) was reasonable: [~]95% of hippocampal subfields have "excellent" numerical reliability (ICCs[≥]0.90), however, only 67% of amygdala subnuclei met this same threshold. Spatial reliability was similarly reasonable, with 58% of hippocampal subfields and 44% of amygdala subnuclei having Dice coefficients[≥]0.70. Notably, multiple regions had poor numerical and/or spatial reliability. We also examined correlations between spatial reliability and person-level factors (e.g., participant age; T1 image quality). Both sex and image scan quality were related to variations in spatial reliability metrics. Examined collectively, our work suggests caution should be exercised for a few hippocampal subfields and amygdala nuclei with more variable reliability.
- Citations
- 41
- FWCI
- 2.91
- Field percentile
- top 7%
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- A (Sub)field Guide to Quality Control in Hippocampal Subfield Segmentation on High-resolution T2-weighted MRI
Kelsey L. Canada, Negar Mazloum‐Farzaghi, … the Hippocampal Subfields Group·Human Brain MappingPeer-reviewed·Oct 15, 2024
- Sample size buys detection, not localisation: an identifiability limit for hippocampal subfield morphometry
R. Debona, Roger Walz·bioRxiv·Aug 24, 2026
- Subcortical brain segmentation in 5-year-old children: validation of FSL-FIRST and FreeSurfer against manual segmentation
Kristian Lidauer, Elmo P. Pulli, … Jetro J. Tuulari·bioRxiv·May 28, 2021
- Reliability and sensitivity of two whole-brain segmentation approaches included in FreeSurfer - ASEG and SAMSEG
Donatas Sederevičius, Dídac Vidal-piñeiro A, … for the Alzheimers Disease Neuroimaging Initiative·NeuroImagePeer-reviewed·May 1, 2021
- Characterization of hippocampal subfields using histology-based annotated postmortem MRI: Lessons for in vivo segmentation II
HL Tucker, Bradley G. Karat, … LEM Wisse·bioRxiv·Nov 21, 2025
- Harmonized Protocol for Subfield Segmentation in the Hippocampal Body on High-Resolution in vivo MRI from the Hippocampal Subfields Group (HSG)
Ana M. Daugherty, Valerie A. Carr, … Hippocampal Subfields Group·HippocampusPeer-reviewed·Feb 3, 2026