ArticleMagnetic resonance in medicine2019
A new analysis approach for T
Article in Magnetic resonance in medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Detection of Lipid-Mediated Diffused Pathological Changes in Multiple Sclerosis.Research square · 2026Article
- Assessment of Optimal T1/T2-Weighted Combinations for Myelin Sensitivity: Effects of Echo Time and Exponents.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2026Article
- Myelin water fraction mapping from multiple echo spin echoes and an independent BMagnetic resonance in medicine · 2022Article
- Fast, Accurate, and Robust T2 Mapping of Articular Cartilage by Neural Networks.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Improved estimation of myelin water fractions with learned parameter distributions.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2021Article
- Parsimonious discretization for characterizing multi-exponential decay in magnetic resonance.NMR in biomedicine · 2020Article
- A new analysis approach for TMagnetic resonance in medicine · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeIn vivo myelin quantification can provide valuable noninvasive information on neuronal maturation and development, as well as insights into neurological disorders. Multiexponential analysis of multiecho T
methodsThe orthogonal matching pursuit algorithm is proposed as an alternative method for the estimation of the MWF. The orthogonal matching pursuit is a greedy sparse reconstruction algorithm with a low computation complexity. For validation, both methods are compared to a ground truth using numerical simulations and a phantom model using comparable computation times. The numerical simulations were used to measure the theoretical errors, as well as the effects of varying the SNR, strength of the regularization, and resolution of the basis set. Additionally, a phantom model was used to estimate the performance of the 2 methods while including errors occurring due to the MR measurement. Lastly, 4 healthy subjects were scanned to evaluate the in vivo performance.
resultsThe results in simulations and phantoms demonstrate that the MWFs determined with the orthogonal matching pursuit are 1.7 times more accurate as compared to the nonnegative least squares, with a comparable precision. The remaining bias of the MWF is shown to be related to the regularization of the nonnegative least squares algorithm and the Rician noise present in magnitude MR images.
conclusionThe orthogonal matching pursuit algorithm provides a more accurate alternative for T
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.