ArticleJournal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI2019
Patient respiratory-triggered quantitative T
Article in Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnosing abdominal neoplasms using a T2 mapping radial turbo spin-echo technique with partial volume correction.European radiology · 2026Article
- Accelerated free-breathing abdominal T2 mapping with deep learning reconstruction of radial turbo spin-echo data.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2025Article
- Value of MRI - T2 Mapping to Differentiate Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2024Article
- Reproducibility and repeatability of quantitative T2 and T2* mapping of osteosarcomas in a mouse model.European radiology experimental · 2024Article
- T1 and T2-mapping in pancreatic MRI: Current evidence and future perspectives.European journal of radiology open · 2024Article
- Normative volumes and relaxation times at 3T during brain development.Scientific data · 2024Article
- Multiparametric quantitative MRI of healthy adult pancreas: correlations with gender and age.Frontiers in gastroenterology (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Free-breathing and instantaneous abdominal TEuropean radiology · 2023Article
- Feasibility of accelerated T2 mapping for the preoperative assessment of endometrial carcinoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Abdominal T2-Weighted Imaging and T2 Mapping Using a Variable Flip Angle Radial Turbo Spin-Echo Technique.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2022Article
- Accelerated T2 Mapping of the Lumbar Intervertebral Disc: Highly Undersampled K-Space Data for Robust T2 Relaxation Time Measurement in Clinically Feasible Acquisition Times.Investigative radiology · 2020Article
- Magnetic resonance fingerprinting of the pancreas at 1.5 T and 3.0 T.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Multiparametric Mapping Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Pancreatic Disease.Frontiers in physiology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLong acquisition times and motion sensitivity limit T PURPOSE: To test the feasibility of respiratory-triggered quantitative T STUDY TYPE: Retrospective single-center pilot study. POPULATION: Eighty-eight adults. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: Ten-fold accelerated multiecho-spin-echo 3 T MRI sequence to quantify T ASSESSMENT: Two radiologists independently delineated three regions of interest inside the pancreatic head, body, and tail for each acquisition. Means and standard deviations for T STATISTICAL TESTS: Interreader reliability was determined by calculating the interclass coefficient (ICCs). T
resultsThe accelerated T DATA
conclusionThe feasibility of accelerated T LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Technical Efficacy: Stage 1 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019;50:410-416.
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.