ArticleJournal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI2015
Sensitivity and specificity of univariate MRI analysis of experimentally degraded cartilage under clinical imaging conditions.
Article in Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- A serial multiparametric quantitative magnetic resonance imaging study to assess proteoglycan depletion of human articular cartilage and its effects on functionality.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Functional MRI for evaluation of hyaline cartilage extracelullar matrix, a physiopathological-based approach.The British journal of radiology · 2019Review
- Towards Patient-Specific Computational Modelling of Articular Cartilage on the Basis of Advanced Multiparametric MRI Techniques.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- MR Parametric Mapping as a Biomarker of Early Joint Degeneration.Sports health · 2016Review
- Multi-parametric MRI characterization of enzymatically degraded articular cartilage.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2016Article
- Classification of histologically scored human knee osteochondral plugs by quantitative analysis of magnetic resonance images at 3T.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of classification of pathomimetically degraded bovine nasal cartilage at 3 Tesla and 37°C using univariate MRI measurements of both pure parameter values and intensities of parameter-weighted images.
methodsPre- and posttrypsin degradation values of T1 , T2 , T2 *, magnetization transfer ratio (MTR), and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), and corresponding weighted images, were analyzed. Classification based on the Euclidean distance was performed and the quality of classification was assessed through sensitivity, specificity and accuracy (ACC).
resultsThe classifiers with the highest accuracy values were ADC (ACC = 0.82 ± 0.06), MTR (ACC = 0.78 ± 0.06), T1 (ACC = 0.99 ± 0.01), T2 derived from a three-dimensional (3D) spin-echo sequence (ACC = 0.74 ± 0.05), and T2 derived from a 2D spin-echo sequence (ACC = 0.77 ± 0.06), along with two of the diffusion-weighted signal intensities (b = 333 s/mm(2) : ACC = 0.80 ± 0.05; b = 666 s/mm(2) : ACC = 0.85 ± 0.04). In particular, T1 values differed substantially between the groups, resulting in atypically high classification accuracy. The second-best classifier, diffusion weighting with b = 666 s/mm(2) , as well as all other parameters evaluated, exhibited substantial overlap between pre- and postdegradation groups, resulting in decreased accuracies.
conclusionClassification according to T1 values showed excellent test characteristics (ACC = 0.99), with several other parameters also showing reasonable performance (ACC > 0.70). Of these, diffusion weighting is particularly promising as a potentially practical clinical modality. As in previous work, we again find that highly statistically significant group mean differences do not necessarily translate into accurate clinical classification rules.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.