ArticleMagma (New York, N.Y.)2017
Comparison of two quantitative proton density mapping methods in multiple sclerosis.
Article in Magma (New York, N.Y.), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Linking immune-mediated damage to neurodegeneration in multiple sclerosis: could network-based MRI help?Brain communications · 2021Article
- A Single-Scan, Rapid Whole-Brain Protocol for Quantitative Water Content Mapping With Neurobiological Implications.Frontiers in neurology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveProton density (PD) mapping requires correction for the receive profile (RP), which is frequently performed via bias-field correction. An alternative RP-mapping method utilizes a comparison of uncorrected PD-maps and a value ρ(T1) directly derived from T1-maps via the Fatouros equation. This may be problematic in multiple sclerosis (MS), if respective parameters are only valid for healthy brain tissue. We aimed to investigate whether the alternative method yields correct PD values in MS patients. MATERIALS/
methodsPD mapping was performed on 27 patients with relapsing-remitting MS and 27 healthy controls, utilizing both methods, yielding reference PD values (PD
resultsPD
conclusionRP correction utilizing the auxiliary parameter ρ(T1) derived via the Fatouros equation provides accurate PD results in MS patients, in spite of discrepancies between ρ(T1) and actual PD values.
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.