A survey of medical image registration - under review
A retrospective view on the past two decades of the field of medical image registration is presented, guided by the article "A survey of medical image registration" (Maintz and Viergever, 1998). It shows that the classification of the field introduced in that article is still usable, altho...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Viergever, Max A [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2016 |
|---|
| Rechteinformationen: |
Nutzungsrecht: Copyright © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: Medical image analysis - Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier, 1996, 33(2016), Seite 140-144 |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:33 ; year:2016 ; pages:140-144 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1016/j.media.2016.06.030 |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
OLC1983582891 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a2200265 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | OLC1983582891 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230714221721.0 | ||
| 007 | tu | ||
| 008 | 161013s2016 xx ||||| 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1016/j.media.2016.06.030 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a PQ20161012 |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)OLC1983582891 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)GBVOLC1983582891 | ||
| 035 | |a (PRQ)c918-441ce77e50799818a09ff4163c8becee54d46e713194c51193e580621306ffd20 | ||
| 035 | |a (KEY)0392983320160000033000000140surveyofmedicalimageregistrationunderreview | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 004 |q ZDB |
| 100 | 1 | |a Viergever, Max A |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 2 | |a A survey of medical image registration - under review |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2016 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen |b n |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Band |b nc |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a A retrospective view on the past two decades of the field of medical image registration is presented, guided by the article "A survey of medical image registration" (Maintz and Viergever, 1998). It shows that the classification of the field introduced in that article is still usable, although some modifications to do justice to advances in the field would be due. The main changes over the last twenty years are the shift from extrinsic to intrinsic registration, the primacy of intensity-based registration, the breakthrough of nonlinear registration, the progress of inter-subject registration, and the availability of generic image registration software packages. Two problems that were called urgent already 20 years ago, are even more urgent nowadays: Validation of registration methods, and translation of results of image registration research to clinical practice. It may be concluded that the field of medical image registration has evolved, but still is in need of further development in various aspects. | ||
| 540 | |a Nutzungsrecht: Copyright © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. | ||
| 700 | 1 | |a Maintz, J B Antoine |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Klein, Stefan |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Murphy, Keelin |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Staring, Marius |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Pluim, Josien P W |4 oth | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Medical image analysis |d Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier, 1996 |g 33(2016), Seite 140-144 |w (DE-627)223260010 |w (DE-600)1356436-5 |w (DE-576)080160034 |x 1361-8415 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:33 |g year:2016 |g pages:140-144 |
| 856 | 4 | 1 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2016.06.030 |3 Volltext |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |u http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27427472 |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_OLC | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-MAT | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHA | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-DE-84 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4219 | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 33 |j 2016 |h 140-144 | ||
| author_variant |
m a v ma mav |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
article:13618415:2016----::sreomdclmgrgsrto |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2016 |
| publishDate |
2016 |
| allfields |
10.1016/j.media.2016.06.030 doi PQ20161012 (DE-627)OLC1983582891 (DE-599)GBVOLC1983582891 (PRQ)c918-441ce77e50799818a09ff4163c8becee54d46e713194c51193e580621306ffd20 (KEY)0392983320160000033000000140surveyofmedicalimageregistrationunderreview DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 004 ZDB Viergever, Max A verfasserin aut A survey of medical image registration - under review 2016 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier A retrospective view on the past two decades of the field of medical image registration is presented, guided by the article "A survey of medical image registration" (Maintz and Viergever, 1998). It shows that the classification of the field introduced in that article is still usable, although some modifications to do justice to advances in the field would be due. The main changes over the last twenty years are the shift from extrinsic to intrinsic registration, the primacy of intensity-based registration, the breakthrough of nonlinear registration, the progress of inter-subject registration, and the availability of generic image registration software packages. Two problems that were called urgent already 20 years ago, are even more urgent nowadays: Validation of registration methods, and translation of results of image registration research to clinical practice. It may be concluded that the field of medical image registration has evolved, but still is in need of further development in various aspects. Nutzungsrecht: Copyright © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Maintz, J B Antoine oth Klein, Stefan oth Murphy, Keelin oth Staring, Marius oth Pluim, Josien P W oth Enthalten in Medical image analysis Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier, 1996 33(2016), Seite 140-144 (DE-627)223260010 (DE-600)1356436-5 (DE-576)080160034 1361-8415 nnns volume:33 year:2016 pages:140-144 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2016.06.030 Volltext http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27427472 GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-MAT SSG-OLC-PHA SSG-OLC-DE-84 GBV_ILN_4219 AR 33 2016 140-144 |
| spelling |
10.1016/j.media.2016.06.030 doi PQ20161012 (DE-627)OLC1983582891 (DE-599)GBVOLC1983582891 (PRQ)c918-441ce77e50799818a09ff4163c8becee54d46e713194c51193e580621306ffd20 (KEY)0392983320160000033000000140surveyofmedicalimageregistrationunderreview DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 004 ZDB Viergever, Max A verfasserin aut A survey of medical image registration - under review 2016 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier A retrospective view on the past two decades of the field of medical image registration is presented, guided by the article "A survey of medical image registration" (Maintz and Viergever, 1998). It shows that the classification of the field introduced in that article is still usable, although some modifications to do justice to advances in the field would be due. The main changes over the last twenty years are the shift from extrinsic to intrinsic registration, the primacy of intensity-based registration, the breakthrough of nonlinear registration, the progress of inter-subject registration, and the availability of generic image registration software packages. Two problems that were called urgent already 20 years ago, are even more urgent nowadays: Validation of registration methods, and translation of results of image registration research to clinical practice. It may be concluded that the field of medical image registration has evolved, but still is in need of further development in various aspects. Nutzungsrecht: Copyright © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Maintz, J B Antoine oth Klein, Stefan oth Murphy, Keelin oth Staring, Marius oth Pluim, Josien P W oth Enthalten in Medical image analysis Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier, 1996 33(2016), Seite 140-144 (DE-627)223260010 (DE-600)1356436-5 (DE-576)080160034 1361-8415 nnns volume:33 year:2016 pages:140-144 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2016.06.030 Volltext http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27427472 GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-MAT SSG-OLC-PHA SSG-OLC-DE-84 GBV_ILN_4219 AR 33 2016 140-144 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1016/j.media.2016.06.030 doi PQ20161012 (DE-627)OLC1983582891 (DE-599)GBVOLC1983582891 (PRQ)c918-441ce77e50799818a09ff4163c8becee54d46e713194c51193e580621306ffd20 (KEY)0392983320160000033000000140surveyofmedicalimageregistrationunderreview DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 004 ZDB Viergever, Max A verfasserin aut A survey of medical image registration - under review 2016 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier A retrospective view on the past two decades of the field of medical image registration is presented, guided by the article "A survey of medical image registration" (Maintz and Viergever, 1998). It shows that the classification of the field introduced in that article is still usable, although some modifications to do justice to advances in the field would be due. The main changes over the last twenty years are the shift from extrinsic to intrinsic registration, the primacy of intensity-based registration, the breakthrough of nonlinear registration, the progress of inter-subject registration, and the availability of generic image registration software packages. Two problems that were called urgent already 20 years ago, are even more urgent nowadays: Validation of registration methods, and translation of results of image registration research to clinical practice. It may be concluded that the field of medical image registration has evolved, but still is in need of further development in various aspects. Nutzungsrecht: Copyright © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Maintz, J B Antoine oth Klein, Stefan oth Murphy, Keelin oth Staring, Marius oth Pluim, Josien P W oth Enthalten in Medical image analysis Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier, 1996 33(2016), Seite 140-144 (DE-627)223260010 (DE-600)1356436-5 (DE-576)080160034 1361-8415 nnns volume:33 year:2016 pages:140-144 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2016.06.030 Volltext http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27427472 GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-MAT SSG-OLC-PHA SSG-OLC-DE-84 GBV_ILN_4219 AR 33 2016 140-144 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1016/j.media.2016.06.030 doi PQ20161012 (DE-627)OLC1983582891 (DE-599)GBVOLC1983582891 (PRQ)c918-441ce77e50799818a09ff4163c8becee54d46e713194c51193e580621306ffd20 (KEY)0392983320160000033000000140surveyofmedicalimageregistrationunderreview DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 004 ZDB Viergever, Max A verfasserin aut A survey of medical image registration - under review 2016 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier A retrospective view on the past two decades of the field of medical image registration is presented, guided by the article "A survey of medical image registration" (Maintz and Viergever, 1998). It shows that the classification of the field introduced in that article is still usable, although some modifications to do justice to advances in the field would be due. The main changes over the last twenty years are the shift from extrinsic to intrinsic registration, the primacy of intensity-based registration, the breakthrough of nonlinear registration, the progress of inter-subject registration, and the availability of generic image registration software packages. Two problems that were called urgent already 20 years ago, are even more urgent nowadays: Validation of registration methods, and translation of results of image registration research to clinical practice. It may be concluded that the field of medical image registration has evolved, but still is in need of further development in various aspects. Nutzungsrecht: Copyright © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Maintz, J B Antoine oth Klein, Stefan oth Murphy, Keelin oth Staring, Marius oth Pluim, Josien P W oth Enthalten in Medical image analysis Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier, 1996 33(2016), Seite 140-144 (DE-627)223260010 (DE-600)1356436-5 (DE-576)080160034 1361-8415 nnns volume:33 year:2016 pages:140-144 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2016.06.030 Volltext http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27427472 GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-MAT SSG-OLC-PHA SSG-OLC-DE-84 GBV_ILN_4219 AR 33 2016 140-144 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1016/j.media.2016.06.030 doi PQ20161012 (DE-627)OLC1983582891 (DE-599)GBVOLC1983582891 (PRQ)c918-441ce77e50799818a09ff4163c8becee54d46e713194c51193e580621306ffd20 (KEY)0392983320160000033000000140surveyofmedicalimageregistrationunderreview DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 004 ZDB Viergever, Max A verfasserin aut A survey of medical image registration - under review 2016 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier A retrospective view on the past two decades of the field of medical image registration is presented, guided by the article "A survey of medical image registration" (Maintz and Viergever, 1998). It shows that the classification of the field introduced in that article is still usable, although some modifications to do justice to advances in the field would be due. The main changes over the last twenty years are the shift from extrinsic to intrinsic registration, the primacy of intensity-based registration, the breakthrough of nonlinear registration, the progress of inter-subject registration, and the availability of generic image registration software packages. Two problems that were called urgent already 20 years ago, are even more urgent nowadays: Validation of registration methods, and translation of results of image registration research to clinical practice. It may be concluded that the field of medical image registration has evolved, but still is in need of further development in various aspects. Nutzungsrecht: Copyright © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Maintz, J B Antoine oth Klein, Stefan oth Murphy, Keelin oth Staring, Marius oth Pluim, Josien P W oth Enthalten in Medical image analysis Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier, 1996 33(2016), Seite 140-144 (DE-627)223260010 (DE-600)1356436-5 (DE-576)080160034 1361-8415 nnns volume:33 year:2016 pages:140-144 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2016.06.030 Volltext http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27427472 GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-MAT SSG-OLC-PHA SSG-OLC-DE-84 GBV_ILN_4219 AR 33 2016 140-144 |
| language |
English |
| source |
Enthalten in Medical image analysis 33(2016), Seite 140-144 volume:33 year:2016 pages:140-144 |
| sourceStr |
Enthalten in Medical image analysis 33(2016), Seite 140-144 volume:33 year:2016 pages:140-144 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| dewey-raw |
004 |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
Medical image analysis |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Viergever, Max A @@aut@@ Maintz, J B Antoine @@oth@@ Klein, Stefan @@oth@@ Murphy, Keelin @@oth@@ Staring, Marius @@oth@@ Pluim, Josien P W @@oth@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2016-01-01T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
223260010 |
| dewey-sort |
14 |
| id |
OLC1983582891 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a2200265 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">OLC1983582891</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230714221721.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">tu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">161013s2016 xx ||||| 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.media.2016.06.030</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="028" ind1="5" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">PQ20161012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)OLC1983582891</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)GBVOLC1983582891</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(PRQ)c918-441ce77e50799818a09ff4163c8becee54d46e713194c51193e580621306ffd20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(KEY)0392983320160000033000000140surveyofmedicalimageregistrationunderreview</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">004</subfield><subfield code="q">ZDB</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Viergever, Max A</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">A survey of medical image registration - under review</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2016</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen</subfield><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Band</subfield><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">A retrospective view on the past two decades of the field of medical image registration is presented, guided by the article "A survey of medical image registration" (Maintz and Viergever, 1998). It shows that the classification of the field introduced in that article is still usable, although some modifications to do justice to advances in the field would be due. The main changes over the last twenty years are the shift from extrinsic to intrinsic registration, the primacy of intensity-based registration, the breakthrough of nonlinear registration, the progress of inter-subject registration, and the availability of generic image registration software packages. Two problems that were called urgent already 20 years ago, are even more urgent nowadays: Validation of registration methods, and translation of results of image registration research to clinical practice. It may be concluded that the field of medical image registration has evolved, but still is in need of further development in various aspects.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="540" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Nutzungsrecht: Copyright © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Maintz, J B Antoine</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Klein, Stefan</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Murphy, Keelin</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Staring, Marius</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Pluim, Josien P W</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Medical image analysis</subfield><subfield code="d">Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier, 1996</subfield><subfield code="g">33(2016), Seite 140-144</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)223260010</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)1356436-5</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)080160034</subfield><subfield code="x">1361-8415</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:33</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2016</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:140-144</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="1"><subfield code="u">http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2016.06.030</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27427472</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_OLC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-MAT</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-DE-84</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4219</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">33</subfield><subfield code="j">2016</subfield><subfield code="h">140-144</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| author |
Viergever, Max A |
| spellingShingle |
Viergever, Max A ddc 004 A survey of medical image registration - under review |
| authorStr |
Viergever, Max A |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)223260010 |
| format |
Article |
| dewey-ones |
004 - Data processing & computer science |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut |
| collection |
OLC |
| remote_str |
false |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| issn |
1361-8415 |
| topic_title |
004 ZDB A survey of medical image registration - under review |
| topic |
ddc 004 |
| topic_unstemmed |
ddc 004 |
| topic_browse |
ddc 004 |
| format_facet |
Aufsätze Gedruckte Aufsätze |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
nc |
| author2_variant |
j b a m jba jbam s k sk k m km m s ms j p w p jpw jpwp |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
Medical image analysis |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
223260010 |
| dewey-tens |
000 - Computer science, knowledge & systems |
| hierarchy_top_title |
Medical image analysis |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)223260010 (DE-600)1356436-5 (DE-576)080160034 |
| title |
A survey of medical image registration - under review |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)OLC1983582891 (DE-599)GBVOLC1983582891 (PRQ)c918-441ce77e50799818a09ff4163c8becee54d46e713194c51193e580621306ffd20 (KEY)0392983320160000033000000140surveyofmedicalimageregistrationunderreview |
| title_full |
A survey of medical image registration - under review |
| author_sort |
Viergever, Max A |
| journal |
Medical image analysis |
| journalStr |
Medical image analysis |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| dewey-hundreds |
000 - Computer science, information & general works |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2016 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
| container_start_page |
140 |
| author_browse |
Viergever, Max A |
| container_volume |
33 |
| class |
004 ZDB |
| format_se |
Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Viergever, Max A |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1016/j.media.2016.06.030 |
| dewey-full |
004 |
| title_sort |
survey of medical image registration - under review |
| title_auth |
A survey of medical image registration - under review |
| abstract |
A retrospective view on the past two decades of the field of medical image registration is presented, guided by the article "A survey of medical image registration" (Maintz and Viergever, 1998). It shows that the classification of the field introduced in that article is still usable, although some modifications to do justice to advances in the field would be due. The main changes over the last twenty years are the shift from extrinsic to intrinsic registration, the primacy of intensity-based registration, the breakthrough of nonlinear registration, the progress of inter-subject registration, and the availability of generic image registration software packages. Two problems that were called urgent already 20 years ago, are even more urgent nowadays: Validation of registration methods, and translation of results of image registration research to clinical practice. It may be concluded that the field of medical image registration has evolved, but still is in need of further development in various aspects. |
| abstractGer |
A retrospective view on the past two decades of the field of medical image registration is presented, guided by the article "A survey of medical image registration" (Maintz and Viergever, 1998). It shows that the classification of the field introduced in that article is still usable, although some modifications to do justice to advances in the field would be due. The main changes over the last twenty years are the shift from extrinsic to intrinsic registration, the primacy of intensity-based registration, the breakthrough of nonlinear registration, the progress of inter-subject registration, and the availability of generic image registration software packages. Two problems that were called urgent already 20 years ago, are even more urgent nowadays: Validation of registration methods, and translation of results of image registration research to clinical practice. It may be concluded that the field of medical image registration has evolved, but still is in need of further development in various aspects. |
| abstract_unstemmed |
A retrospective view on the past two decades of the field of medical image registration is presented, guided by the article "A survey of medical image registration" (Maintz and Viergever, 1998). It shows that the classification of the field introduced in that article is still usable, although some modifications to do justice to advances in the field would be due. The main changes over the last twenty years are the shift from extrinsic to intrinsic registration, the primacy of intensity-based registration, the breakthrough of nonlinear registration, the progress of inter-subject registration, and the availability of generic image registration software packages. Two problems that were called urgent already 20 years ago, are even more urgent nowadays: Validation of registration methods, and translation of results of image registration research to clinical practice. It may be concluded that the field of medical image registration has evolved, but still is in need of further development in various aspects. |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-MAT SSG-OLC-PHA SSG-OLC-DE-84 GBV_ILN_4219 |
| title_short |
A survey of medical image registration - under review |
| url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2016.06.030 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27427472 |
| remote_bool |
false |
| author2 |
Maintz, J B Antoine Klein, Stefan Murphy, Keelin Staring, Marius Pluim, Josien P W |
| author2Str |
Maintz, J B Antoine Klein, Stefan Murphy, Keelin Staring, Marius Pluim, Josien P W |
| ppnlink |
223260010 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
n |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| author2_role |
oth oth oth oth oth |
| doi_str |
10.1016/j.media.2016.06.030 |
| up_date |
2024-07-03T21:23:39.661Z |
| _version_ |
1803594571092852736 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a2200265 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">OLC1983582891</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230714221721.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">tu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">161013s2016 xx ||||| 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.media.2016.06.030</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="028" ind1="5" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">PQ20161012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)OLC1983582891</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)GBVOLC1983582891</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(PRQ)c918-441ce77e50799818a09ff4163c8becee54d46e713194c51193e580621306ffd20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(KEY)0392983320160000033000000140surveyofmedicalimageregistrationunderreview</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">004</subfield><subfield code="q">ZDB</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Viergever, Max A</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">A survey of medical image registration - under review</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2016</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen</subfield><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Band</subfield><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">A retrospective view on the past two decades of the field of medical image registration is presented, guided by the article "A survey of medical image registration" (Maintz and Viergever, 1998). It shows that the classification of the field introduced in that article is still usable, although some modifications to do justice to advances in the field would be due. The main changes over the last twenty years are the shift from extrinsic to intrinsic registration, the primacy of intensity-based registration, the breakthrough of nonlinear registration, the progress of inter-subject registration, and the availability of generic image registration software packages. Two problems that were called urgent already 20 years ago, are even more urgent nowadays: Validation of registration methods, and translation of results of image registration research to clinical practice. It may be concluded that the field of medical image registration has evolved, but still is in need of further development in various aspects.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="540" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Nutzungsrecht: Copyright © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Maintz, J B Antoine</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Klein, Stefan</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Murphy, Keelin</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Staring, Marius</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Pluim, Josien P W</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Medical image analysis</subfield><subfield code="d">Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier, 1996</subfield><subfield code="g">33(2016), Seite 140-144</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)223260010</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)1356436-5</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)080160034</subfield><subfield code="x">1361-8415</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:33</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2016</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:140-144</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="1"><subfield code="u">http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2016.06.030</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27427472</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_OLC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-MAT</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-DE-84</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4219</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">33</subfield><subfield code="j">2016</subfield><subfield code="h">140-144</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.3995905 |