ArticleNeuroImage2021
Comparison of methods for spectral alignment and signal modelling of GABA-edited MR spectroscopy data.
Article in NeuroImage, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neurochemical Correlates of Mind-Wandering and Meta-Awareness.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026Article
- Distinct neurochemical predictors for different phases of decision-making learning.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2025Article
- Neurochemical Predictors of Generalized Learning Induced by Brain Stimulation and Training.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2024Article
- Individual Differences in Decision Strategy Relate to Neurochemical Excitability and Cortical Thickness.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2023Article
- On the relationship between GABA+ and glutamate across the brain.NeuroImage · 2022Article
- Comparison of seven modelling algorithms for γ-aminobutyric acid-edited proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy.NMR in biomedicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Many methods exist for aligning and quantifying magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) data to measure in vivo γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA). Research comparing the performance of these methods is scarce partly due to the lack of ground-truth measurements. The concentration of GABA is approximately two times higher in grey matter than in white matter. Here we use the proportion of grey matter within the MRS voxel as a proxy for ground-truth GABA concentration to compare the performance of four spectral alignment methods (i.e., retrospective frequency and phase drift correction) and six GABA signal modelling methods. We analyse a diverse dataset of 432 MEGA-PRESS scans targeting multiple brain regions and find that alignment to the creatine (Cr) signal produces GABA+ estimates that account for approximately twice as much of the variance in grey matter as the next best performing alignment method. Further, Cr alignment was the most robust, producing the fewest outliers. By contrast, all signal modelling methods, except for the single-Lorentzian model, performed similarly well. Our results suggest that variability in performance is primarily caused by differences in the zero-order phase estimated by each alignment method, rather than frequency, resulting from first-order phase offsets within subspectra. These results provide support for Cr alignment as the optimal method of processing MEGA-PRESS to quantify GABA. However, more broadly, they demonstrate a method of benchmarking quantification of in vivo metabolite concentration from other MRS sequences.
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.