henhaobio
Sign in

Abstract

A critical step before data-sharing of human neuroimaging is removing facial features to protect individuals privacy. However, not only does this process redact identifiable information about individuals, but it also removes non-identifiable information. This introduces undesired variability into downstream analysis and interpretation. This registered report investigated the degree to which the so-called defacing altered the quality assessment of T1-weighted images of the human brain from the openly available "IXI dataset". The effect of defacing on manual quality assessment was investigated on a single-site subset of the dataset (N=185). By comparing two linear mixed-effects models, we determined that four trained human raters perception of quality was significantly influenced by defacing by modeling their ratings on the same set of images in two conditions: "nondefaced" (i.e., preserving facial features) and "defaced". In addition, we investigated these biases on automated quality assessments by applying repeated-measures, multivariate ANOVA (rm-MANOVA) on the image quality metrics extracted with MRIQC on the full IXI dataset (N=581; three acquisition sites). This study found that defacing altered the quality assessments by humans and showed that MRIQCs quality metrics were mostly insensitive to defacing.

Citations
0

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.

Similarity Map
SelectedSame fieldCross-field
THISDelbarre '22Fonov '18Dahnke '25Gilmore '21Hagen '26Esteban '19
70% semantic matchNeuroscience
Daniel J. Delbarre, Luís Santos, Habib Ganjgahi+6 more·Computers in Biology and Medicine·Oct 18, 2022· 10 citations