ArticleMagnetic resonance in medicine2021
Local perturbation responses and checkerboard tests: Characterization tools for nonlinear MRI methods.
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.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bilevel Optimized Implicit Neural Representation for Scan-Specific Accelerated MRI Reconstruction.IEEE transactions on medical imaging · 2026Article
- Well-designed k-space coverage is important for good MRI denoising.Magma (New York, N.Y.) · 2026Article
- Assessment of resolution and noise in magnetic resonance images reconstructed by data driven approaches.Zeitschrift fur medizinische Physik · 2025Article
- Using deep feature distances for evaluating the perceptual quality of MR image reconstructions.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2025Article
- Spherical echo-planar time-resolved imaging (sEPTI) for rapid 3D quantitativeMagnetic resonance in medicine · 2025Article
- Blip-up blip-down circular EPI (BUDA-cEPI) for distortion-free dMRI with rapid unrolled deep learning reconstruction.Magnetic resonance imaging · 2025Article
- Diffusion tensor brain imaging at 0.55T: A feasibility study.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2024Article
- The "hidden noise" problem in MR image reconstruction.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2024Article
- High-resolution prostate diffusion MRI using eddy current-nulled convex optimized diffusion encoding and random matrix theory-based denoising.Magma (New York, N.Y.) · 2024Article
- Improved reconstruction for highly accelerated propeller diffusion 1.5 T clinical MRI.Magma (New York, N.Y.) · 2024Article
- Multi-Scale Energy (MuSE) framework for inverse problems in imaging.IEEE transactions on computational imaging · 2024Article
- Evaluating increases in sensitivity from NORDIC for diverse fMRI acquisition strategies.NeuroImage · 2023Article
- 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 · 2023Article
- SNR Enhancement for Multi-TE MRSI Using Joint Low-Dimensional Model and Spatial Constraints.IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering · 2022Article
- Stabilizing deep tomographic reconstruction: Part A. Hybrid framework and experimental results.Patterns (New York, N.Y.) · 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
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
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.