Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29527572›Full record

ArticleJournal of nature and science2018

Variability in Quantitative DCE-MRI: Sources and Solutions.

Harrison Kim

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of nature and science, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing 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

35 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Implementation and evaluation of a dynamic contrast-enhanced MR perfusion protocol for glioblastoma using a 0.35 T MRI-Linac system.Physica medica : PM : an international journal devoted to the applications of physics to medicine and biology : official journal of the Italian Association of Biomedical Physics (AIFB) · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Advanced MR Techniques for Preoperative Glioma Characterization: Part 1.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2023
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

1 author.

Harrison KimDepartment of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, VH G082C5, 1670 University Boulevard, Birmingham, AL 35294-0012 (phone: 205-996-4088, fax: 205-975-6522.

Funding

XRAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA013148 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI Robert S Welner · 1985 to 2026
$165.9M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA013148
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

DCE-MRI has been extensively used for diagnosis, prognosis and therapy monitoring of various diseases including cancer. However, it has been reported that the perfusion parameters measured by DCE-MRI largely vary across different research sites, preventing data comparison in multi-institutional clinical trials. Recently, novel perfusion phantoms have been developed to correct scanner-driven errors, enabling quality assurance of quantitative DCE-MRI measurement. However, the sources for the variability in quantitating perfusion parameters are not only MRI scanners but also software packages and imaging protocols set by the operators. In this manuscript, the various sources influencing the variability in quantitative DCE-MRI measurement are reviewed, and the proper solutions to minimize those are discussed.

Indexed as

DCE-MRIPhantomPharmacokinetic analysisQuality assuranceQuantification

Identifiers

PMID29527572
PMCPMC5841165

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.