ArticleMagnetic resonance in medicine2023
Effect of subject-specific head morphometry on specific absorption rate estimates in parallel-transmit MRI at 7 T.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Electromagnetic Field Stimulation Effects on Intrinsically Disordered Proteins and Their Role in Aging and Neurodegeneration.Journal of biomedical science and engineering · 2025Article
- Neurostimulation devices to treat Alzheimer's disease.Exploration of neuroscience · 2025Article
- A Novel Design of a Portable Birdcage via Meander Line Antenna (MLA) to Lower Beta Amyloid (Aβ) in Alzheimer's Disease.IEEE journal of translational engineering in health and medicine · 2025Article
- Effect of subject-specific head morphometry on specific absorption rate estimates in parallel-transmit MRI at 7 T.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo assess the accuracy of morphing an established reference electromagnetic head model to a subject-specific morphometry for the estimation of specific absorption rate (SAR) in 7T parallel-transmit (pTx) MRI.
methodsSynthetic T
resultsThe averaged error in maximum 10-g averaged SAR estimation across pTx MRI shim sets between the MIDA and the Duke target model was reduced from 17.5% with only rigid-body registration, to 11.8% when affine linear registration was used, and further reduced to 10.7% when nonlinear registration was used. The corresponding figures for the Ella model were 16.7%, 11.2%, and 10.1%.
conclusionWe found that morphometry accounts for up to half of the subject-specific differences in pTx SAR. Both linear and nonlinear morphing of an electromagnetic model into a target subject improved SAR agreement by better matching head size, morphometry, and position. However, differences remained, likely arising from details in tissue composition estimation. Thus, the uncertainty of the head morphometry and tissue composition may need to be considered separately to achieve personalized SAR estimation.
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.