Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31605558›Full record

ArticleMagnetic resonance in medicine2020

Calibration of arterial spin labeling data-potential pitfalls in post-processing.

Joana Pinto, Michael A Chappell, Thomas W Okell, Melvin Mezue, Andrew R Segerdahl, Irene Tracey, Pedro Vilela, Patrícia Figueiredo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Magnetic resonance in medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing 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

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Endocrine modulation of cortical and retinal baseline perfusion across the menstrual cycle.Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

8 authors.

Joana PintoInstitute for Systems and Robotics and Department of Bioengineering, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-6863-1883
Michael A ChappellWellcome Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging, FMRIB, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-1802-4214
Thomas W OkellWellcome Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging, FMRIB, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-8258-0659
Melvin MezueWellcome Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging, FMRIB, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Andrew R SegerdahlWellcome Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging, FMRIB, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Irene TraceyWellcome Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging, FMRIB, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Pedro VilelaImaging Department, Hospital da Luz, Lisbon, Portugal.
Patrícia FigueiredoInstitute for Systems and Robotics and Department of Bioengineering, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-0743-0869

Funding

Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 203139/Z/16/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo assess the impact of the different post-processing options in the calibration of arterial spin labeling (ASL) data on perfusion quantification and its reproducibility. THEORY AND

methodsAbsolute quantification of perfusion measurements is one of the promises of ASL techniques. However, it is highly dependent on a calibration procedure that involves a complex processing pipeline for which no standardized procedure has been fully established. In this work, we systematically compare the main ASL calibration methods as well as various post-processing calibration options, using 2 data sets acquired with the most common sequences, pulsed ASL and pseudo-continuous ASL.

resultsSignificant and sometimes large discrepancies in ASL perfusion quantification were obtained when using different post-processing calibration options. Nevertheless, when using a set of theoretically based and carefully chosen options, only small differences were observed for both reference tissue and voxelwise methods. The voxelwise and white matter reference tissue methods were less sensitive to post-processing options than the cerebrospinal fluid reference tissue method. However, white matter reference tissue calibration also produced poorer reproducibility results. Moreover, it may also not be an appropriate reference in case of white matter pathology.

conclusionPoor post-processing calibration options can lead to large errors in perfusion quantification, and a complete description of the calibration procedure should therefore be reported in ASL studies. Overall, our results further support the voxelwise calibration method proposed by the ASL white paper, particularly given the advantage of being relatively simple to implement and intrinsically correcting for the coil sensitivity profile.

Indexed as

Cerebrovascular CirculationMagnetic Resonance ImagingBrainCalibrationReproducibility of ResultsSpin LabelsSpin LabelsASLcalibrationcerebral blood flowkinetic modelingMRI

Identifiers

PMID31605558
PMCPMC6972489

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.