ArticleScientific reports2022
Liver diffusion-weighted MR imaging with L1-regularized iterative sensitivity encoding reconstruction based on single-shot echo-planar imaging: initial clinical experience.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Technical Advancements in Abdominal Diffusion-weighted Imaging.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To investigate whether combining L1-regularized iterative sensitivity encoding (SENSE) reconstruction and single-shot echo planar imaging (EPI) is useful in hepatic DWI. Single-shot EPI-DWI with L1-regularized iterative SENSE reconstruction (L1-DWI) and conventional parallel imaging-based reconstruction (conv-DWI) in liver MRI were compared in volunteers and patients. For the patient cohort, 75 subjects (60 ± 13 years) with 349 focal liver lesions (FLL) were included. Patient groups A and B were used to reduce acquisition time or improve spatial resolution, respectively. Image parameters were rated on a 5-point scale. The number of FLLs was recorded; in case of discrepancy, the reason for non-detectability was analyzed. In volunteers, higher signal-to-noise ratio (24.4 ± 5.6 vs. 12.2 ± 2.3, p < 0.001 at b = 0; 19.3 ± 2.8 vs. 9.8 ± 1.6, p < 0.001 at b = 800) and lower standard deviation of the apparent diffusion coefficient-values (0.17 vs. 0.20 mm
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.