ArticleiScience2020
Spatially Adaptive Regularization in Total Field Inversion for Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping.
Article in iScience, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Recommended implementation of quantitative susceptibility mapping for clinical research in the brain: A consensus of the ISMRM electro-magnetic tissue properties study group.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2024Article
- Maximum spherical mean value filtering for whole-brain QSM.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Adaptive Total Field Inversion is described for quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM) reconstruction from total field data through a spatially adaptive suppression of shadow artifacts through spatially adaptive regularization. The regularization for shadow suppression consists of penalizing low-frequency components of susceptibility in regions of small susceptibility contrasts as estimated by R2∗ derived signal intensity. Compared with a conventional local field method and two previously proposed regularized total field inversion methods, improvements were demonstrated in phantoms and subjects without and with hemorrhages. This algorithm, named TFIR, demonstrates the lowest error in numerical and gadolinium phantom datasets. In COSMOS data, TFIR performs well in matching ground truth in high-susceptibility regions. For patient data, TFIR comes close to meeting the quality of the reference local field method and outperforms other total field techniques in both clinical scores and shadow reduction.
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.