Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28479342›Full record

ArticleMagnetic resonance imaging2017

Normalizing data from GABA-edited MEGA-PRESS implementations at 3 Tesla.

Ashley D Harris, Nicolaas A J Puts, S Andrea Wijtenburg, Laura M Rowland, Mark Mikkelsen, Peter B Barker, C John Evans, Richard A E Edden

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Magnetic resonance imaging, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Spectral editing inNMR in biomedicine · 2021
    Article
  8. Contribution of macromolecules to brainNMR in biomedicine · 2021
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
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.

Ashley D HarrisDepartment of Radiology, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada; Child and Adolescent Imaging Research (CAIR) Program, Alberta Children's Hospital Research Institute, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada; Hotchkiss Brain Institute, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada; Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA; F.M. Kirby Research Center for Functional Brain Imaging, Kennedy Krieger Institute, Baltimore, MD, USA. Electronic address: ashley.harris2@ucalgary.ca.
Nicolaas A J PutsRussell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA; F.M. Kirby Research Center for Functional Brain Imaging, Kennedy Krieger Institute, Baltimore, MD, USA.
S Andrea WijtenburgMaryland Psychiatric Research Center, Department of Psychiatry, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Laura M RowlandRussell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA; Maryland Psychiatric Research Center, Department of Psychiatry, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Mark MikkelsenRussell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA; F.M. Kirby Research Center for Functional Brain Imaging, Kennedy Krieger Institute, Baltimore, MD, USA; CUBRIC, School of Psychology, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
Peter B BarkerRussell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA; F.M. Kirby Research Center for Functional Brain Imaging, Kennedy Krieger Institute, Baltimore, MD, USA.
C John EvansCUBRIC, School of Psychology, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
Richard A E EddenRussell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA; F.M. Kirby Research Center for Functional Brain Imaging, Kennedy Krieger Institute, Baltimore, MD, USA.

Funding

TR&D 4: Algorithms for functional and anatomical brain analysisP41EB015909 · NIBIB · HUGO W. MOSER RES INST KENNEDY KRIEGER · PI VAN ZIJL, PETER CM · 2012 to 2020
$13.1M
Universal GABA-edited MRS at 3TR01EB016089 · NIBIB · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI Richard Anthony Edward Edden · 2013 to 2026
$5.4M
NIBIB NIH HHS P41 EB015909NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB016089
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Standardization of results is an important milestone in the maturation of any truly quantitative methodology. For instance, a lack of measurement agreement across imaging platforms limits multisite studies, between-study comparisons based on the literature, and inferences based on and the generalizability of results. In GABA-edited MEGA-PRESS, two key sources of differences between implementations are: differences in editing efficiency of GABA and the degree of co-editing of macromolecules (MM). In this work, GABA editing efficiency κ and MM-co-editing μ constants are determined for three widely used MEGA-PRESS implementations (on the most common MRI platforms; GE, Philips, and Siemens) by phantom experiments. Implementation-specific κ,μ-corrections were then applied to two in vivo datasets, one consisted of 8 subject scanned on the three platforms and the other one subject scanned eight times on each platform. Manufacturer-specific κ and μ values were determined as: κ

Indexed as

AdultFemalegamma-Aminobutyric AcidHumansMacromolecular SubstancesMagnetic Resonance SpectroscopyMalePhantoms, Imaginggamma-Aminobutyric AcidMacromolecular SubstancesCross-platformEditing efficiencyGABAMacromolecular co-editingMEGA-PRESSMulti-site

Identifiers

PMID28479342
PMCPMC5581667

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.