Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34192682›Full record

ArticlePhysics in medicine and biology2021

Optimizing constrained reconstruction in magnetic resonance imaging for signal detection.

Angel R Pineda, Hope Miedema, Sajan Goud Lingala, Krishna S Nayak

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Physics in medicine and biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors.

Angel R PinedaDepartment of Mathematics, Manhattan College, Riverdale, NY 10471, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-8820-0511
Hope MiedemaDepartment of Mathematics, Manhattan College, Riverdale, NY 10471, United States of America.
Sajan Goud LingalaRoy J. Carver Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242, United States of America.
Krishna S NayakDepartment of Electrical Engineering, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089, United States of America.

Funding

Optimizing Acquisition and Reconstruction of Under-sampled MRI for Signal DetectionR15EB029172 · NIBIB · MANHATTAN COLLEGE · PI PINEDA, ANGEL RAMON · 2020 to 2023
$827k
NIBIB NIH HHS R15 EB029172
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Constrained reconstruction in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) allows the use of prior information through constraints to improve reconstructed images. These constraints often take the form of regularization terms in the objective function used for reconstruction. Constrained reconstruction leads to images which appear to have fewer artifacts than reconstructions without constraints but because the methods are typically nonlinear, the reconstructed images have artifacts whose structure is hard to predict. In this work, we compared different methods of optimizing the regularization parameter using a total variation (TV) constraint in the spatial domain and sparsity in the wavelet domain for one-dimensional (2.56×) undersampling using variable density undersampling. We compared the mean squared error (MSE), structural similarity (SSIM), L-curve and the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUC) using a linear discriminant for detecting a small and a large signal. We used a signal-known-exactly task with varying backgrounds in a simulation where the anatomical variation was the major source of clutter for the detection task. Our results show that the AUC dependence on regularization parameters varies with the imaging task (i.e. the signal being detected). The choice of regularization parameters for MSE, SSIM, L-curve and AUC were similar. We also found that a model-based reconstruction including TV and wavelet sparsity did slightly better in terms of AUC than just enforcing data consistency but using these constraints resulted in much better MSE and SSIM. These results suggest that the increased performance in MSE and SSIM over-estimate the improvement in detection performance for the tasks in this paper. The MSE and SSIM metrics show a big difference in performance where the difference in AUC is small. To our knowledge, this is the first time that signal detection with varying backgrounds has been used to optimize constrained reconstruction in MRI.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsMagnetic Resonance ImagingArtifactsComputer SimulationImage Processing, Computer-Assistedconstrained reconstructionmodel observersMRItask performance

Identifiers

PMID34192682
PMCPMC9169904

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.