Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34080720›Full record

ArticleMagnetic resonance in medicine2021

Local perturbation responses and checkerboard tests: Characterization tools for nonlinear MRI methods.

Chin-Cheng Chan, Justin P Haldar

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

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 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The "hidden noise" problem in MR image reconstruction.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Multi-Scale Energy (MuSE) framework for inverse problems in imaging.IEEE transactions on computational imaging · 2024
    Article
  12. Article
  13. On Ambiguity in Linear Inverse Problems: Entrywise Bounds on Nearly Data-Consistent Solutions and Entrywise Condition Numbers.IEEE transactions on signal processing : a publication of the IEEE Signal Processing Society · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Chin-Cheng ChanElectrical and Computer Engineering, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7220-4884
Justin P HaldarElectrical and Computer Engineering, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1838-0211
University of Southern California · US

Funding

Next generation in-vivo diffusion imaging at submillimeter resolutionR01MH116173 · NIMH · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI Yogesh Rathi, Kawin Setsompop · 2018 to 2026
$6.2M
Interactive software for semiautomated analysis of structural brain imagesR01NS074980 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI LEAHY, RICHARD M, SHATTUCK, DAVID W · 2011 to 2021
$5.0M
A Brain Atlas for Mapping Connectivity in Focal EpilepsyR01NS089212 · NINDS · CLEVELAND CLINIC LERNER COM-CWRU · PI LEAHY, RICHARD M, MOSHER, JOHN COMPTON · 2015 to 2019
$2.7M
Area B: Precise DCE-MRI Assessment of Brain TumorsR33CA225400 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI NAYAK, KRISHNA S · 2017 to 2017
$1.6M
National Science Foundation CCF-1350563NCI NIH HHS R33 CA225400NIH HHS R01-MH116173NIH HHS R01-NS074980NIH HHS R01-NS089212NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH116173NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS074980NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS089212University of Southern California USC Viterbi/Graduate School Fellowship
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeModern methods for MR image reconstruction, denoising, and parameter mapping are becoming increasingly nonlinear, black-box, and at risk of "hallucination." These trends mean that traditional tools for judging confidence in an image (visual quality assessment, point-spread functions (PSFs), g-factor maps, etc.) are less helpful than before. This paper describes and evaluates an approach that can help with assessing confidence in images produced by arbitrary nonlinear methods. THEORY AND

methodsWe propose to characterize nonlinear methods by examining the images they produce before and after applying controlled perturbations to the measured data. This results in functions known as local perturbation responses (LPRs) that can provide useful insight into sensitivity, spatial resolution, and aliasing characteristics. LPRs can be viewed as generalizations of classical PSFs, and are are very flexible-they can be applied to arbitary nonlinear methods and arbitrary datasets across a range of different reconstruction, denoising, and parameter mapping applications. Importantly, LPRs do not require a ground truth image.

resultsImpulse-based and checkerboard-pattern LPRs are demonstrated in image reconstruction and denoising scenarios. We observe that these LPRs provide insights into spatial resolution, signal leakage, and aliasing that are not available with other methods. We also observe that popular reference-based image quality metrics (eg, mean-squared error and structural similarity) do not always correlate with good LPR characteristics.

conclusionsLPRs are a useful tool that can be used to characterize and assess confidence in nonlinear MR methods, and provide insights that are distinct from and complementary to existing quality assessments.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMagnetic Resonance Imagingdenoisingimage reconstructionlocal perturbation responsespoint-spread functionsspatial resolution analysis

Identifiers

PMID34080720
PMCPMC8880254
OpenAlexW3165032792

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.