ArticleScientific reports2017
A scale to measure MRI contrast agent sensitivity.
Article in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Organic functionality in responsive paramagnetic nanostructures.Frontiers in chemistry · 2025Review
- Computational insight into a mechanistic overview of water exchange kinetics and thermodynamic stabilities of bis and tris-aquated complexes of lanthanides.RSC advances · 2023Article
- A primer onFrontiers in medicine · 2023Review
- IONPs-Based Medical Imaging in Cancer Care: Moving Beyond Traditional Diagnosis and Therapeutic Assessment.International journal of nanomedicine · 2023Review
- Bright Ferritin-a Reporter Gene Platform for On-Demand, Longitudinal Cell Tracking on MRI.iScience · 2020Article
- Brain iron deposition after Ferumoxytol-enhanced MRI: A study of Porcine Brains.Nanotheranostics · 2020Article
- Iodine quantification and detectability thresholds among major dual-energy CT platforms.The British journal of radiology · 2019Article
- Anticancer Ruthenium(III) Complexes and Ru(III)-Containing Nanoformulations: An Update on the Mechanism of Action and Biological Activity.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Review
- Methodological Aspects for Preclinical Evaluation of Gadolinium Presence in Brain Tissue: Critical Appraisal and Suggestions for Harmonization-A Joint Initiative.Investigative radiology · 2018Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) provides superior resolution of anatomical features and the best soft tissue contrast, and is one of the predominant imaging modalities. With this technique, contrast agents are often used to aid discrimination by enhancing specific features. Over the years, a rich diversity of such agents has evolved and with that, so has a need to systematically sort contrast agents based on their efficiency, which directly determines sensitivity. Herein, we present a scale to rank MRI contrast agents. The scale is based on analytically determining the minimum detectable concentration of a contrast agent, and employing a ratiometric approach to standardize contrast efficiency to a benchmark contrast agent. We demonstrate the approach using several model contrast agents and compare the relative sensitivity of these agents for the first time. As the first universal metric of contrast agent sensitivity, this scale will be vital to easily assessing contrast agent efficiency and thus important to promoting use of some of the elegant and diverse contrast agents in research and clinical practice.
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.