ArticleMagma (New York, N.Y.)2022
A comparison of emulsifiers for the formation of oil-in-water emulsions: stability of the emulsions within 9 h after production and MR signal properties.
Article in Magma (New York, N.Y.), 2022. 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, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multimodal assessment of arterial stiffness using photoplethysmography and laser Doppler flowmetry.NPJ cardiovascular health · 2026Article
- Recipe for Hydrogels With Tunable Relaxation and Diffusion Properties for Use as MRI Test Materials.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2026Article
- Surfactant-Based Polymer Microchip Electrophoresis of Ciprofloxacin Hydrochloride Monohydrate in Unfiltered Milk With Fluorescence Detection.Electrophoresis · 2025Article
- A straightforward procedure to build a non-toxic relaxometry phantom with desired T1 and T2 times at 3T.Magma (New York, N.Y.) · 2024Article
- The Antioxidant, Anti-Inflammatory and Moisturizing Effects ofMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Quantitative MRI of diffuse liver diseases: techniques and tissue-mimicking phantoms.Magma (New York, N.Y.) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo provide a basis for the selection of suitable emulsifiers in oil-in-water emulsions used as tissue analogs for MRI experiments. Three different emulsifiers were investigated with regard to their ability to stabilize tissue-like oil-in-water emulsions. Furthermore, MR signal properties of the emulsifiers themselves and influences on relaxation times and ADC values of the aqueous phase were investigated. MATERIALS AND
methodsPolysorbate 60, sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) and soy lecithin were used as emulsifiers. MR characteristics of emulsifiers were assessed in aqueous solutions and their function as a stabilizer was examined in oil-in-water emulsions of varying fat content (10, 20, 30, 40, 50%). Stability and homogeneity of the oil-in-water emulsions were evaluated with a delay of 3 h and 9 h after preparation using T
resultsEmulsions stabilized by polysorbate 60 or soy lecithin were stable and homogeneous across all tested fat fractions. In contrast, emulsions with SDS showed a significantly lower stability and homogeneity. Recorded T
conclusionLecithin is suggested as the preferred emulsifier of oil-in-water emulsions in MRI as it shows a high stabilizing ability and remains invisible in MRI experiments. In addition, lecithin is suitable as an alternative means of adjusting relaxation times and ADC values of water.
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.