Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26268435›Full record

ArticleJournal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI2016

Selecting the reference image for registration of CEST series.

Yi Zhang, Hye-Young Heo, Dong-Hoon Lee, Xuna Zhao, Shanshan Jiang, Kai Zhang, Haiyun Li, Jinyuan Zhou

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

43 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Yi ZhangDivision of MR Research, Department of Radiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Hye-Young HeoDivision of MR Research, Department of Radiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Dong-Hoon LeeDivision of MR Research, Department of Radiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Xuna ZhaoDivision of MR Research, Department of Radiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Shanshan JiangDivision of MR Research, Department of Radiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Kai ZhangDivision of MR Research, Department of Radiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Haiyun LiDivision of MR Research, Department of Radiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Jinyuan ZhouDivision of MR Research, Department of Radiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

Funding

Amide Proton Transfer (APT) MRI of Brain Tumors at 3T and 7TR01EB009731 · NIBIB · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI ZHOU, JINYUAN · 2009 to 2016
$2.9M
Academic-Industrial Partnership to Develop Clinical Brain Cancer ImagingR01CA166171 · NCI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI VAN ZIJL, PETER CM, ZHOU, JINYUAN · 2013 to 2017
$2.4M
US-China Collaborative Research on Stroke ImagingR01NS083435 · NINDS · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI ZHOU, JINYUAN · 2013 to 2015
$588k
Molecular MRI of Radiation Necrosis in Preclinical ModelsR21EB015555 · NIBIB · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI ZHOU, JINYUAN · 2012 to 2013
$447k
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA166171NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB009731NIBIB NIH HHS R21 EB015555NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS083435
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo compare different reference images selected for registration among chemical exchange saturation transfer (CEST) series. MATERIALS AND

methodsFive normal volunteers and eight brain tumor patients were studied on a 3 Tesla scanner. Image registration was performed by choosing each of the acquired CEST saturation or unsaturation dynamic images as the reference. CEST images at 3.5 ppm (amide proton transfer, APT) were computed for each motion-corrected data set after main magnetic field inhomogeneity correction. A uniformity index was defined to quantify the efficacy of image registration using different reference images. Joint histograms and the structural similarity index (SSIM) were used to analyze the intrinsic image similarity between various dynamic images.

resultsImage registration increased the average uniformity index by 18% if the 3.5 ppm saturated image was selected as the reference image. However, registering to the unsaturated dynamic image reduced the uniformity index by 13% on average. The joint histogram analysis showed that the saturated dynamic images were highly similar (SSIM = 0.89 ± 0.01), and were considerably different from the unsaturated dynamic image (SSIM = 0.58 ± 0.03).

conclusionThe selection of the 3.5 ppm dynamic image as the reference image generated the highest uniformity index for APT imaging though other saturated images were equally suited as reference images.

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingBrain NeoplasmsCase-Control StudiesContrast MediaHealthy VolunteersHumansImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMagnetic FieldsModels, StatisticalMotionReference ValuesContrast MediaAPT imagingbrain tumorCEST imagingimage registration

Identifiers

PMID26268435
PMCPMC4752933

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.