Cargando…

De‐identification procedures for magnetic resonance images and the impact on structural brain measures at different ages

Surface rendering of MRI brain scans may lead to identification of the participant through facial characteristics. In this study, we evaluate three methods that overwrite voxels containing privacy‐sensitive information: Face Masking, FreeSurfer defacing, and FSL defacing. We included structural T1‐w...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Buimer, Elizabeth E. L., Schnack, Hugo G., Caspi, Yaron, van Haren, Neeltje E. M., Milchenko, Mikhail, Pas, Pascal, Hulshoff Pol, Hilleke E., Brouwer, Rachel M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8249889/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33973694
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hbm.25459
_version_ 1783716995537043456
author Buimer, Elizabeth E. L.
Schnack, Hugo G.
Caspi, Yaron
van Haren, Neeltje E. M.
Milchenko, Mikhail
Pas, Pascal
Hulshoff Pol, Hilleke E.
Brouwer, Rachel M.
author_facet Buimer, Elizabeth E. L.
Schnack, Hugo G.
Caspi, Yaron
van Haren, Neeltje E. M.
Milchenko, Mikhail
Pas, Pascal
Hulshoff Pol, Hilleke E.
Brouwer, Rachel M.
author_sort Buimer, Elizabeth E. L.
collection PubMed
description Surface rendering of MRI brain scans may lead to identification of the participant through facial characteristics. In this study, we evaluate three methods that overwrite voxels containing privacy‐sensitive information: Face Masking, FreeSurfer defacing, and FSL defacing. We included structural T1‐weighted MRI scans of children, young adults and older adults. For the young adults, test–retest data were included with a 1‐week interval. The effects of the de‐identification methods were quantified using different statistics to capture random variation and systematic noise in measures obtained through the FreeSurfer processing pipeline. Face Masking and FSL defacing impacted brain voxels in some scans especially in younger participants. FreeSurfer defacing left brain tissue intact in all cases. FSL defacing and FreeSurfer defacing preserved identifiable characteristics around the eyes or mouth in some scans. For all de‐identification methods regional brain measures of subcortical volume, cortical volume, cortical surface area, and cortical thickness were on average highly replicable when derived from original versus de‐identified scans with average regional correlations >.90 for children, young adults, and older adults. Small systematic biases were found that incidentally resulted in significantly different brain measures after de‐identification, depending on the studied subsample, de‐identification method, and brain metric. In young adults, test–retest intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were comparable for original scans and de‐identified scans with average regional ICCs >.90 for (sub)cortical volume and cortical surface area and ICCs >.80 for cortical thickness. We conclude that apparent visual differences between de‐identification methods minimally impact reliability of brain measures, although small systematic biases can occur.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8249889
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82498892021-07-09 De‐identification procedures for magnetic resonance images and the impact on structural brain measures at different ages Buimer, Elizabeth E. L. Schnack, Hugo G. Caspi, Yaron van Haren, Neeltje E. M. Milchenko, Mikhail Pas, Pascal Hulshoff Pol, Hilleke E. Brouwer, Rachel M. Hum Brain Mapp Research Articles Surface rendering of MRI brain scans may lead to identification of the participant through facial characteristics. In this study, we evaluate three methods that overwrite voxels containing privacy‐sensitive information: Face Masking, FreeSurfer defacing, and FSL defacing. We included structural T1‐weighted MRI scans of children, young adults and older adults. For the young adults, test–retest data were included with a 1‐week interval. The effects of the de‐identification methods were quantified using different statistics to capture random variation and systematic noise in measures obtained through the FreeSurfer processing pipeline. Face Masking and FSL defacing impacted brain voxels in some scans especially in younger participants. FreeSurfer defacing left brain tissue intact in all cases. FSL defacing and FreeSurfer defacing preserved identifiable characteristics around the eyes or mouth in some scans. For all de‐identification methods regional brain measures of subcortical volume, cortical volume, cortical surface area, and cortical thickness were on average highly replicable when derived from original versus de‐identified scans with average regional correlations >.90 for children, young adults, and older adults. Small systematic biases were found that incidentally resulted in significantly different brain measures after de‐identification, depending on the studied subsample, de‐identification method, and brain metric. In young adults, test–retest intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were comparable for original scans and de‐identified scans with average regional ICCs >.90 for (sub)cortical volume and cortical surface area and ICCs >.80 for cortical thickness. We conclude that apparent visual differences between de‐identification methods minimally impact reliability of brain measures, although small systematic biases can occur. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2021-05-11 /pmc/articles/PMC8249889/ /pubmed/33973694 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hbm.25459 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Human Brain Mapping published by Wiley Periodicals LLC. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Articles
Buimer, Elizabeth E. L.
Schnack, Hugo G.
Caspi, Yaron
van Haren, Neeltje E. M.
Milchenko, Mikhail
Pas, Pascal
Hulshoff Pol, Hilleke E.
Brouwer, Rachel M.
De‐identification procedures for magnetic resonance images and the impact on structural brain measures at different ages
title De‐identification procedures for magnetic resonance images and the impact on structural brain measures at different ages
title_full De‐identification procedures for magnetic resonance images and the impact on structural brain measures at different ages
title_fullStr De‐identification procedures for magnetic resonance images and the impact on structural brain measures at different ages
title_full_unstemmed De‐identification procedures for magnetic resonance images and the impact on structural brain measures at different ages
title_short De‐identification procedures for magnetic resonance images and the impact on structural brain measures at different ages
title_sort de‐identification procedures for magnetic resonance images and the impact on structural brain measures at different ages
topic Research Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8249889/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33973694
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hbm.25459
work_keys_str_mv AT buimerelizabethel deidentificationproceduresformagneticresonanceimagesandtheimpactonstructuralbrainmeasuresatdifferentages
AT schnackhugog deidentificationproceduresformagneticresonanceimagesandtheimpactonstructuralbrainmeasuresatdifferentages
AT caspiyaron deidentificationproceduresformagneticresonanceimagesandtheimpactonstructuralbrainmeasuresatdifferentages
AT vanharenneeltjeem deidentificationproceduresformagneticresonanceimagesandtheimpactonstructuralbrainmeasuresatdifferentages
AT milchenkomikhail deidentificationproceduresformagneticresonanceimagesandtheimpactonstructuralbrainmeasuresatdifferentages
AT paspascal deidentificationproceduresformagneticresonanceimagesandtheimpactonstructuralbrainmeasuresatdifferentages
AT deidentificationproceduresformagneticresonanceimagesandtheimpactonstructuralbrainmeasuresatdifferentages
AT hulshoffpolhillekee deidentificationproceduresformagneticresonanceimagesandtheimpactonstructuralbrainmeasuresatdifferentages
AT brouwerrachelm deidentificationproceduresformagneticresonanceimagesandtheimpactonstructuralbrainmeasuresatdifferentages