ArticleRoyal Society open science2017
Workshop on reconstruction schemes for magnetic resonance data: summary of findings and recommendations.
Article in Royal Society open science, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Workshop on reconstruction schemes for magnetic resonance data: summary of findings and recommendations.Royal Society open science · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The high-fidelity reconstruction of compressed and low-resolution magnetic resonance (MR) data is essential for simultaneously improving patient care, accuracy in diagnosis and quality in clinical research. Sponsored by the Royal Society through the Newton Mobility Grant Scheme, we held a half-day workshop on reconstruction schemes for MR data on 17 August 2016 to discuss new ideas from related research fields that could be useful to overcome the shortcomings of the conventional reconstruction methods that have been evaluated to date. Participants were 21 university students, computer scientists, image analysts, engineers and physicists from institutions from six different countries. The discussion evolved around exploring new avenues to achieve high resolution, high quality and fast acquisition of MR imaging. In this article, we summarize the topics covered throughout the workshop and make recommendations for ongoing and future works.
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.