ArticleMagnetic resonance in medicine2021
Minimum electric-field gradient coil design: Theoretical limits and practical guidelines.
Article in Magnetic resonance in medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Electric field calculation and peripheral nerve stimulation prediction for head and body gradient coils.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Optimization, implementation, and performance of TMS coils with maximum focality and various stimulation depths.Journal of neural engineering · 2026Article
- Initial assessment of PNS safety for interventionalists during image-guided procedures.Magma (New York, N.Y.) · 2025Article
- Experimental validation of a PNS-optimized whole-body gradient coil.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2024Article
- A Huygens' surface approach to rapid characterization of peripheral nerve stimulation.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2022Article
- Minimum electric-field gradient coil design: Theoretical limits and practical guidelines.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo develop new concepts for minimum electric-field (E-field) gradient design, and to define the extents to which E-field can be reduced in gradient design while maintaining a desired imaging performance.
methodsEfficient calculation of induced electric field in simplified patient models was integrated into gradient design software, allowing constraints to be placed on the peak E-field. Gradient coils confined to various build envelopes were designed with minimum E-fields subject to standard magnetic field constraints. We examined the characteristics of E-field-constrained gradients designed for imaging the head and body and the importance of asymmetry and concomitant fields in achieving these solutions.
resultsFor transverse gradients, symmetric solutions create high levels of E-fields in the shoulder region, while fully asymmetric solutions create high E-fields on the top of the head. Partially asymmetric solutions result in the lowest E-fields, balanced between shoulders and head and resulting in factors of 1.8 to 2.8 reduction in E-field for x-gradient and y-gradient coils, respectively, when compared with the symmetric designs of identical gradient distortion.
conclusionsWe introduce a generalized method for minimum E-field gradient design and define the theoretical limits of magnetic energy and peak E-field for gradient coils of arbitrary cylindrical geometry.
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.