Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36426737›Full record

ArticleMagnetic resonance in medicine2023

Truly reproducible uniform estimation of the ADC with multi-b diffusion data- Application in prostate diffusion imaging.

Stefan Kuczera, Fredrik Langkilde, Stephan E Maier

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Magnetic resonance in medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. 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

3 authors.

Stefan KuczeraDepartment of Radiology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0001-8684-8982
Fredrik LangkildeDepartment of Radiology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Stephan E MaierDepartment of Radiology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe ADC is a well-established parameter for clinical diagnostic applications, but lacks reproducibility because it is also influenced by the choice diffusion weighting level. A framework is evaluated that is based on multi-b measurement over a wider range of diffusion-weighting levels and higher order tissue diffusion modeling with retrospective, fully reproducible ADC calculation.

methodsAveraging effect from curve fitting for various model functions at 20 linearly spaced b-values was determined by means of simulations and theoretical calculations. Simulation and patient multi-b image data were used to compare the new approach for diffusion-weighted image and ADC map reconstruction with and without Rician bias correction to an active clinical trial protocol probing three non-zero b-values.

resultsAveraging effect at a certain b-value varies for model function and maximum b-value used. Images and ADC maps from the novel procedure are on-par with the clinical protocol. Higher order modeling and Rician bias correction is feasible, but comes at the cost of longer computation times.

conclusionsApplication of the new framework makes higher order modeling more feasible in a clinical setting while still providing patient images and reproducible ADC maps of adequate quality.

Indexed as

Diffusion Magnetic Resonance ImagingProstateComputer SimulationHumansMaleReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesADCb-valuediffusionkurtosisprostate

Identifiers

PMID36426737
PMCPMC10100221

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.